[plt-scheme] Re: Is R6RS useless for PLT?

From: Shriram Krishnamurthi (sk at cs.brown.edu)
Date: Tue Nov 18 09:48:09 EST 2008

Out of curiosity, how many Perl implementations do you routinely port
between?  Or Ruby implementations?  Or Tcl implementations?

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 9:40 AM,  <kbohdan at mail.ru> wrote:
> The only problem is that I'm forced to choose between power and portability.
> --
> Bohdan
> Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>> As the naming conventions in DrScheme suggest, we consider
>> our Module language the primary development vehicle. R6RS,
>> like R5RS, is supported and available. Bug reports and
>> feature requests are taken seriously. As Robby indicates,
>> R6RS is our bridge to other Scheme implementations and we
>> would like libraries to flow into our world. -- Matthias
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme

Posted on the users mailing list.