Re: [scheme-reports-wg2] Erratum 17 for the definition of guard incorrect?

10 views
Skip to first unread message

Arthur A. Gleckler

unread,
Oct 31, 2016, 11:14:48 AM10/31/16
to scheme-re...@googlegroups.com, scheme-reports-wg1

CC-ing <scheme-reports-wg1>.


On Oct 31, 2016 8:12 AM, "Alex Shinn" <alex...@gmail.com> wrote:
I believe you're correct.  We adopted the R6RS text directly,
then noticed the R6RS errata and changed from raise to
raise-continuable in rev 2e3519634b5e, which is in the final
draft.  So erratum 17 should be removed.

-- 
Alex

On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 3:31 AM, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <marc....@gmail.com> wrote:
Erratum 17 on http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/wiki/R7RSSmallErrata changes the definition of `guard` in R7RS, allegedly to make it compatible with `guard' in R6RS and to remove an "unwanted incompatibility with the R6RS definition".

In fact, however, erratum 17 just introduced such an incompatibility because of an much earlier erratum to R6RS given here: http://www.r6rs.org/r6rs-errata.html (see under Standard Libraries § 7.1). So taken the R6RS errata into account, the version as written in R7RS is the correct one.

I stumbled upon this while reading https://github.com/cisco/ChezScheme/issues/87. You can also find there some points that explain why the R7RS behaviour (without erratum 17) is the one that makes most sense.

So I would like to suggest to remove erratum 17 from the list of errata.

Marc

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scheme-reports-wg2" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scheme-reports-wg2+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scheme-reports-wg2" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scheme-reports-wg2+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages