Re: [EXT] Can guile be implementation independent?

[Keith Wright]

Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer@gmail.com> writes:

> On 17.12.2021 18:05, Thompson, David wrote:
>> 
>> I think the shortest and easiest answer to this question,
>> in practice, is "no."
>>
>> I prefer to think of each Scheme implementation as its own distinct
>> language,

I hope not.

> The RnRS have some severe limitations.  In all RnRS:
>
> - No TCP/IP
> - No POSIX or Win32
> - No threads
>
> In R7RS-small, and R5RS and earlier:
>
> - No hash tables
> - No sub-typing

Do we recoginize a distinction between core language and libraries?

Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@gnuvola.org> writes:

>>    I wonder why your releases all seem to target Guile 2
>>    Will this also work with Guile 3?
>
> New Stuff gets my attention sooner when it is kind to Old Stuff.

Q: Can portable code be run with Guile?
A: If you have to ask Guile-2 or Guile-3 then you can't do it.
    (But TTN might.)

  -- Keith