Hello,
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> wrote: > >> Nala Ginrut <nalagin...@gmail.com> skribis: > > record-type in r6rs is more convenient I think. > > That’s not the question. ;-) It doesn’t justify pulling in all of R6RS. > This is just a small part of a much larger review, but it should be possible to import (rnrs records syntactic), right? Or maybe even just (rnrs records) (I don't know much about the R6RS library system). I see that (rnrs records syntactic) pulls in a bunch of other R6RS stuff, which perhaps you won't like. But I think there is something wrong with this idea - the point of having libraries is that we can use them. If we can't use anything from R6RS because we don't want to pull it in, then why did we implement it? I know that supporting other peoples' r6rs programs is also a reason, but I think that Guile should be able to use the libraries it itself bundles. And in theory, using RnRS libraries is nice because it promotes portable Scheme code. (I do agree that R6RS is a sort of weird case, because a lot of it is different names for features that Guile already has in another form. I'm not sure if that changes this or not.) Thanks, Noah
