[plt-scheme] What's the latest on the Scsh port?

From: Eli Barzilay (eli at barzilay.org)
Date: Mon Jul 14 23:50:02 EDT 2003

On Jul 14, Joe Marshall wrote:
> From: "Eli Barzilay" <eli at barzilay.org>
> > 
> > There's another important bit -- if you read an "ls" sexp, then you
> > need to do the right thing even if it is unbound.
> Or ensure that it is bound.

That's an option too, but I think it'll be confusing if you get
bindings just because you used one of these things.  This is even more
confusing with the fact that the expected binding would depend on your
PATH setting, and there are things like `./ls' which should behave
differently...  If you mean bind `ls' and `./ls' to procedures that
will do a search any time they're used then there is another problem
-- I want the fake-procedure thing to be done only on symbols that can
actually get executed, otherwise you'd get no errors for any unbound
variable since procedures are not different than values...

          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                  http://www.barzilay.org/                 Maze is Life!

Posted on the users mailing list.