This site is a static rendering of the Trac instance that was used by R7RS-WG1 for its work on R7RS-small (PDF), which was ratified in 2013. For more information, see Home.

Ticket 513: Error should have been R6RS-compatible

2013-07-07 03:20:44
WG1 - Core
alexshinn
major
cowan
wontfix
source
closed
2013-05-13 08:32:19
defect

Aaron Hsu writes:

There are places in the standard where we have fundamentally introduced gratuitous incompatibility with the R6RS standard “just because it’s R6RS.” An example is the error procedure. Here, there was no reason not to diverge from R6RS’ behavior, especially given that the R6RS behavior is a more expressive, useful form.

cowan
2013-05-13 08:32:32
descriptionAaron Hsu writes: There are places in the standard where we have fundamentally introduced gratuitous incompatibility with the R6RS standard “just because it’s R6RS.” An example is the error procedure. Here, there was no reason not to diverge from R6RS’ behavior, especially given that the R6RS behavior is a more expressive, useful form. Aaron Hsu writes: There are places in the standard where we have fundamentally introduced gratuitous incompatibility with the R6RS standard “just because it’s R6RS.” An example is the `error` procedure. Here, there was no reason not to diverge from R6RS’ behavior, especially given that the R6RS behavior is a more expressive, useful form.
cowan
2013-05-13 08:33:39

R6RS in turn was gratuitously incompatible with SRFI 23, another extremely common SRFI (it is almost always presumed by reference implementations of other SRFIs, even those that predated it). The choice was R6RS, SRFI 23, or both (under different names), and any of these choices would have been justifiable. The WG went with SRFI 23.

cowan
2013-07-07 03:20:44
resolution␣wontfix
statusnewclosed

The WG decided by unanimous consent to take no action on this ticket.