Matthew Dempsky <xxxxxx@flame.org> writes:

> Michael Sperber <xxxxxx@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> writes:
>
> > Matthew> It's my understanding that any existing final SRFI _could_ be
> > Matthew> implemented by every Scheme implementation with primarily minor
> > Matthew> changes -- most can even be implemented entirely in Scheme.
> >
> > That's understanding is mistaken.  A short look reveals at least:

You've missed the point.

For all the other SRFI's, having a fancier Scheme makes it *easier* to
implement SRFI's, not harder.  The other SRFI's say "if your Scheme
is fancy enough, you can implement this."

This is would be the first SRFI to say "if your Scheme is too fancy,
you can't implement this."

I've mentioned this multiple times; it's distressing to see the point
missed once more.

Thomas