Untyped Scheme should be built on Typed Scheme? WAS: Re: [plt-scheme] macro question

Hi Matthias,

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:22 AM, Matthias Felleisen
<matthias at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> On Jun 10, 2008, at 11:40 AM, hendrik at topoi.pooq.com wrote:
>> In my opinion, untyped Scheme needs to be built on top of typed Scheme,
>> not the other way around.  But until this revolution happens, I'm
>> happy to use it they way it is.
>
> NSF wasn't willing to fund a time machine, even when I promised I'd add cold
> fusion.

You were joking around here, but is there any truth to it?

Theoretically if you could start over, would you implement Untyped
Scheme on top of a Typed Scheme?