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

What would you suggest as a primer on R6RS libraries, ideally for  
someone with some knowledge of PLT modules?

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 18, 2008, at 7:03 AM, "Robby Findler" <robby at cs.uchicago.edu>  
wrote:

> Unfortunately, that is a tradeoff we do not yet know how to do better
> on. There has been substantial effort from the PLT world towards R6RS,
> however, so do not think we don't care!
>
> Robby
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 8:40 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
>>
>>
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme