[plt-scheme] Re: PLT R6RS questions and answers

From: Alex Shinn (alexshinn at gmail.com)
Date: Thu Nov 27 03:47:37 EST 2008

Abdulaziz Ghuloum <aghuloum at cs.indiana.edu> writes:

> On Nov 27, 2008, at 1:47 AM, Alex Shinn wrote:
>> Except you haven't ported PSTK to R6RS - that's
>> fundamentally impossible since R6RS supports neither
>> inter-process communication nor an FFI.
> That's in theory, right.  In practice, he did.

No, he didn't.  He had to write several versions for each
implementation, which is why the source contains:


R6RS implementers could in theory work together to agree on
a common inter-process communication library, but the
implementation itself would still not be portable - this is
exactly the scenario we have with R5RS and SRFIs.

I didn't mean to attack R6RS so much as to point out a very
serious limitation in what it can achieve portably.  In the
context of the overall complaint (that code written
specifically for PLT is not portable) this is highly


Posted on the users mailing list.