On 8/13/07, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) hkBst@gentoo.org wrote:
There is no agreed upon standard way to even load SRFIs.
This is also a problem with R6RS, in spite of the standardization of library specifications. The binding of a library identifier to actual code is *not* specified in the document. Personally, I think that is probably a correct thing (otherwise you don't really establish any real platform independence), but it does complicate the self-configuration problem.
Frankly, one of the keys to writing portable code is using modularization techniques to hide the non-portable bits. I really feel that, in the current era of comprehensive IDEs and single-implementation languages, programmers are losing sight of that simple fact. SRFI-0 (and SRFI-7 which doesn't really seem to have caught on) provides that kind of core modularization primitive.
I'd better step down off my R6RS soapbox *right now* :)
david rush