Re: Merging Guile-R6RS-Libs in `master'

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hello Andy,

Andy Wingo <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed 22 Apr 2009 09:55, address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

>> The main differences between these two module systems are module
>> versioning, and phase separation.  Fortunately, R6RS' system is a
>> superset of Guile's, so we could extend the latter so that it could be
>   ^^^^^^^^
>> used as the foundation of the former.
>
> Perhaps you meant to say subset? I believe we'll succeed in implementing
> r6rs modules with Guile modules, but I don't think you could implement
> Guile modules on top of r6rs modules.

Yes, but what I meant to say was that R6RS' module system is stricter,
or more precisely defined than Guile's, but...

> Besides that, I don't think that phasing has any practical implication,
> given the loopholes in the spec -- the set of bindings that a module
> needs can be determined for *all* phases. That is to say, there is one
> set of bindings that satisfies the needs of the spec for all phases of
> evaluation of a module. Bindings needed at expansion time will be
> present at runtime, but that's allowed.

I didn't know the spec was so permissive.  Given that, indeed, R6'
module system is a subset of Guile's.

Thanks,
Ludo'.