[plt-scheme] Re: Is R6RS useless for PLT?

From: Abdulaziz Ghuloum (aghuloum at cs.indiana.edu)
Date: Mon Nov 24 06:00:42 EST 2008

On Nov 24, 2008, at 3:50 AM, Geoffrey S. Knauth wrote:
> If we want all the wonderfulness of DrScheme in a
> pure R6RS flavor and ...

On Nov 24, 2008, at 5:21 AM, Geoffrey S. Knauth wrote:
> My question to PLT would then be, "If someone were
> driven to create a R6RS-pure DrScheme, is it madness?


I don't think Tom's point was that DrScheme should be
rewritten such that its code base in pure R6RS.  Tom is
talking about libraries, modules, or code that people
actively write specifically for PLT vs. libraries that
people write for R6RS that can also be used under PLT.

Suppose that you're developing some component that you
need to develop anyways (it's not important what it is),
and that you would like to make it available for others
to use too (and thus enriching the commons), should you
pick the first route or the second?  (Assume you have
the option of picking between writing a PLT module and
writing an R6RS library with the same functionality)


Posted on the users mailing list.