[sorry - I accidently hit the send-shorcut]

  Per Bothner wrote:
> Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
>> - sometimes many small libraries are best expressed in a single file,
>
> I think this is fairly rare, and not a very important use case.
> If they're small, why should they be separate libraries?

 From a philosphical viewpoint:

   Since libraries in the context of this srfi is new "languages",
   a small library is needed to specify a language that differ
   only slightly from an existing language.

 From a practical viewpoint:

   During initial development, it is very practical to have
   all code in a single file, divided into seperate libraries.
   When the size of the code grows, it becomes practical
   to put the libraries in seperate files.

   Since "wrapper" libraries are common (for, say, renaming a
   function, restricting the exports, adding error checks etc),
   small libraries occur often and should be easy to write and
   test.

--
Jens Axel Søgaard