Re: New draft (#6) and last call for comments on SRFI 266: The expr syntax Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (30 Aug 2026 17:42 UTC)
Re: New draft (#6) and last call for comments on SRFI 266: The expr syntax Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (31 Aug 2026 07:01 UTC)
Re: New draft (#6) and last call for comments on SRFI 266: The expr syntax Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (01 Sep 2026 08:28 UTC)
Re: New draft (#6) and last call for comments on SRFI 266: The expr syntax Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (01 Sep 2026 10:09 UTC)
Re: New draft (#6) and last call for comments on SRFI 266: The expr syntax Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (01 Sep 2026 12:47 UTC)
Re: New draft (#6) and last call for comments on SRFI 266: The expr syntax Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (01 Sep 2026 12:14 UTC)
Re: New draft (#6) and last call for comments on SRFI 266: The expr syntax Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (01 Sep 2026 14:42 UTC)
Re: New draft (#6) and last call for comments on SRFI 266: The expr syntax Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (04 Sep 2026 19:46 UTC)
Re: New draft (#6) and last call for comments on SRFI 266: The expr syntax Peter McGoron (02 Sep 2026 03:50 UTC)

Re: New draft (#6) and last call for comments on SRFI 266: The expr syntax Peter McGoron 02 Sep 2026 03:46 UTC

On 9/1/26 18:02, jobol wrote:
> What stopped me in fact is that Chez Scheme can't test that a library
> is available or not in cond-expand
> (https://github.com/cisco/ChezScheme/issues/91).

Looking at the standard operators, the only one that is not in the R6RS
is "unbox."

Guile ships SRFI 111, and chez-srfi[1] ships one that is a wrapper of
the Chez interface. So I think the sample implementation can import SRFI
111, with a note to remove it if the target implementation doesn't
support it.

 > thank you for that and for your help

You're welcome!

[1]: https://github.com/arcfide/chez-srfi

-- Peter McGoron