semantics and portability
Marc Feeley
(09 Mar 2001 17:55 UTC)
|
Re: semantics and portability
sperber@xxxxxx
(09 Mar 2001 18:04 UTC)
|
Re: semantics and portability
Per Bothner
(09 Mar 2001 19:09 UTC)
|
Re: semantics and portability
sperber@xxxxxx
(10 Mar 2001 08:44 UTC)
|
Re: semantics and portability
Marc Feeley
(09 Mar 2001 19:57 UTC)
|
Re: semantics and portability
sperber@xxxxxx
(10 Mar 2001 08:52 UTC)
|
Re: semantics and portability
sperber@xxxxxx
(20 Mar 2001 10:37 UTC)
|
Re: semantics and portability Marc Feeley (20 Mar 2001 12:35 UTC)
|
Re: semantics and portability
sperber@xxxxxx
(20 Mar 2001 12:52 UTC)
|
Re: semantics and portability
Marc Feeley
(20 Mar 2001 14:49 UTC)
|
Re: semantics and portability
sperber@xxxxxx
(20 Mar 2001 16:35 UTC)
|
Re: semantics and portability
Marc Feeley
(20 Mar 2001 16:55 UTC)
|
> >>>>> "Marc" == Marc Feeley <xxxxxx@IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes: > > Marc> No. All I am saying is that the process started to run the underlying > Marc> interpreter should have the same (shell) environment as the one of > Marc> "scheme-script". > > After rereading this, I'm still not sure I get it. "scheme-script" > *is* the underlying interpreter, no? Well it could be the executable for the interpreter, but it could also be a shell script that execs the appropriate underlying interpreter (Gambit, Scheme48, etc) after doing some administrative checks (that the user has permission to run the interpreter, logging the use of a Scheme script, or whatever). For example, I can perfectly imagine Gambit's interpreter to reside in "gsi" and "scheme-script" is a shell script like this #! /bin/sh ... parse command line options BUT DON'T CHANGE THE ENVIRONMENT! exec gsi ... This means that old versions of Gambit, and probably most current implementations of Scheme, can be SRFI 22 compliant if the appropriate shell script is written for "scheme-script". In future versions of Gambit I plan to install a symbolic link from "scheme-script" to "gsi" and let gsi do the special SRFI 22 command line parsing. Marc