Re: R4RS changes? Code?

[fenchurch!jbs@eddie.mit.edu (Jeff Siegal)]

In article <3348@uoregon.uoregon.edu> will@fog.UUCP (William Clinger) writes:
>I think you are right that relatively few of the people who use Scheme for
>really serious development are writing portable Scheme code.  On the
>Macintosh, for example, "really serious" implies calling ROM routines
>to achieve the Apple look and feel, [...]

This is true in any language, but all "real" languages (Scheme
included) provide ways to package up these system dependencies to
allow easier retargeting of the code.  However, this is quite
different from the non-standardization of actual language features
(e.g. dynamic bindings, macros, internal define's), which can require
converting the lots of code to transport a system.

I'm glad to hear there is at least a possibility of macros becoming
standard; the other features I can live without.  On the other hand,
aren't dynamic bindings required for many of the interesting uses of
call/cc (i.e. catch and throw).

Jeff Siegal