[plt-scheme] Re: PLT R6RS questions and answers (renamed thread)

From: Tom Gordon (thomas.gordon at fokus.fraunhofer.de)
Date: Tue Nov 25 05:08:32 EST 2008

On Nov 25, 2008, at 3:30 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:

> Actually, it would be better if we didn't have another "thread", but
> focused on concrete issues.  As Robby said, "I think it is time to
> stop telling us how more would be better and instead step up and
> contribute".

Lots of people, inside and outside the PLT Scheme community, have been  
contributing to the R6RS effort.   I am aware of about 6  
implementations of R6RS Scheme, in various states of completion:  PLT,  
Ikarus, Larceny, Ypsilon, Mosh and IronScheme.    And most of these  
implementations are focused on R6RS. Their developers contribute  
portable R6RS libraries to the larger community.

Others have been busy porting SRFIs and other code to R6RS.  (Myself  

I just wish that more members of the PLT community would begin and  
effort to port their libraries to R6RS, and choose to develop new  
libraries, whenever feasible in R6RS, rather than some dialect  
supported only by the PLT implementation.   (Not that there may not be  
good reasons for doing this on occasion.)


Posted on the users mailing list.