Thanks! Although I haven't heard of any Scheme implementation that stores its libraries in a database, there is no harm in generalizing the proposal. I will add the necessary wording in the next update.

-S

On Thursday, October 8, 2026 8:03:51 PM (-04:00), Vincent Manis (he/him) wrote:

> This SRFI addresses a real problem, and I think provides a good solution. However, I have a concern about terminology.
>
> It has been noted before in various places that we should not assume that libraries are in files. I like to imagine (and would implement it if I had the time) a PL/Scheme that lived inside Postgres, where there was a table called Libraries that contained all of the libraries. I therefore think that this should be slightly rewritten to say that an implementation can arrange to have a mask, with the properties given here, associated with each library, and recommending that a file-based implementation should look for the mask in the file mask.slm in the library directory.
>
> Masks are useful for implementers, as shown in the examples in the SRFI,  but I am not sure I understand if there are any implications for the developers of individual libraries. I will need to think about that.
>
> -- vincent
>