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

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
> On Mar 23, detmammut at googlemail.com wrote:
>> * see https://code.launchpad.net/~ikarus-libraries-team/ikarus-libraries/srfi
>
> What I also said is that dragging a big piece of code like that,
> rather than adapting existing code, is very problematic.

Why is it problematic for the R6RS SRFI implementation?

If the same R6RS SRFI codebase is used across all implementations; it
should be better exercised and tested.

It also doesn't mess with the PLT SRFI implementations which already work fine.

It isn't this simple, though, is it?