[plt-scheme] Re: Should PLT Scheme have two R6RS namespaces?

Units sounds like the exact proper design choice here.


On Mar 23, 2009, at 12:38 PM, detmammut at googlemail.com wrote:

>> The better approach would be to write wrappers for the immutable
>> implementations?
>
> I currently could imagine 5 ways that could be investigated
>
> a) wrappers
>      + no code duplication
>      - performance?
> b) copy/paste the code in plt into a module that uses the R6RS
> language
>      - code duplication
> c) integrate the files from the r6rs-libraries project on launchpad
>      + one code base for all r6rs implementations
>      - external dependency
> d) move the actual srfi code into a seperate file and use include into
> the PLT and R6RS libaries
>      + no code duplication
>      - no good support in DrScheme? (when editing the included file)
> e) PLT units?
>
>
> Any other ideas?
>
> Regards,
>
> Slom
> _________________________________________________
>   For list-related administrative tasks:
>   http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme