More r6rs/guile Felix Thibault (27 Sep 2020 16:35 UTC)
Re: More r6rs/guile Lassi Kortela (27 Sep 2020 16:39 UTC)
Re: More r6rs/guile Felix Thibault (27 Sep 2020 16:53 UTC)
Re: More r6rs/guile Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (27 Sep 2020 17:17 UTC)
R7RS conformance Lassi Kortela (27 Sep 2020 17:53 UTC)
Re: R7RS conformance Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (27 Sep 2020 18:12 UTC)
Re: R7RS conformance John Cowan (27 Sep 2020 18:47 UTC)
Re: R7RS conformance Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (27 Sep 2020 19:18 UTC)
Re: R7RS conformance John Cowan (27 Sep 2020 19:33 UTC)
Re: R7RS conformance Lassi Kortela (27 Sep 2020 19:47 UTC)
Re: R7RS conformance Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (27 Sep 2020 19:53 UTC)
Re: R7RS conformance Lassi Kortela (27 Sep 2020 19:54 UTC)
Re: More r6rs/guile John Cowan (27 Sep 2020 19:32 UTC)
Re: More r6rs/guile Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (27 Sep 2020 19:57 UTC)
Re: More r6rs/guile Felix Thibault (27 Sep 2020 22:30 UTC)

Re: R7RS conformance Lassi Kortela 27 Sep 2020 19:54 UTC

> A list of nonconformities for each R7RS implementation would be better
> and simpler, I think, than trying to reduce it all to a single number.

True.

Best of all would be a de facto standard test suite, and a well-defined
way to run it on each implementation.

What's the closest thing we have to that -- the Larceny test suite?

> In principle I think this should be included with the implementation
> itself, like the BUGS section on man pages.

This is a good idea.