[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Continuing support for the sls extension

I've already addressed all your below points in these messages:



(Read the entirety of the messages.)

: Derick

On Sun, 2010-01-10 at 19:42 -0600, Eduardo Cavazos wrote:
> Derick,
> In order to support SRFI 103, an implementation would have to recognize
> and honor the 'r6rs-lib' file extension for R6RS libraries. However, the
> 'sls' extension is a defacto standard. I'm assuming that implementations
> could also continue to honor that extension and be compliant with
> SRFI-103.
> If the 'sls' extension can continue to be supported while being SRFI-103
> compliant, then I'm less opposed to the mandated extension.
> What's your view on this?
> Ed