[plt-scheme] to define, or to let

Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> On Mar 21, 2004, at 9:36 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
...
> > 2. MzScheme is not actually R5RS-compliant.
>
> Thanks for not caring about a standard that's subpar.
> >
> > 3. Changing MzScheme's `letrec' to match R5RS.
> >
> > I don't know.
>
> Please don't. It is perfectly okay if someone wants to make the RnRS
> language in DrScheme conforming to some ill-defined,
> committee-regulated (non)standard. I never use that language. But keep
> mzscheme clean.
>
> I'd like to thank Matthew here for showing with mzscheme that Scheme is
> a language that is worthy of some consideration. Without his efforts,
> Scheme wouldn't deserve the attention that it still gets.

I thank Matthew and the entire PLT team for what they've created.

But, I'd encourage taking standards seriously, too.  I'd say a Scheme
standard is at least as important to Scheme as Matthew is.  ;o)

BTW, I do use the R5RS language, and rather like it, because it's very
portable.  Despite loving PLT Scheme, there are things it doesn't do, like
run on the JVM, for example.

Anton