On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Felix Winkelmann wrote:

> Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
>
> > No typing is involved in loading a TeachPack - but the typing-argument
> > is a red herring.
>
> The typing argument is not the main issue, and it was merely brought
> forward in comparison to SRFI-7. It is not the central point which
> Mr. Szoyne is trying to make out of it (presumable because its
> the weakest of the reasons I have given for prefering SRFI-55 over
> SRFI-7).

If 'the typing argument' isn't the main issue, _what_is_?  That lots of
implementations can easily support REQUIRE-EXTENSION?  Even _more_ can
support SRFI 7.  That it's an unquestionable existing mechanism?  SRFI
15, FLUID-LET, was also a pretty widely used mechanism that wasn't
questioned by the author...but notice that he later withdrew it,
because the mechanism was inherently flawed, whereas the intent of the
mechanism, dynamic environment manipulation, was not: thus SRFI 39 (I
still disagree with SRFI 39's design, but it's _much_ better than SRFI
15's.)