Re: [r6rs-discuss] Implementors' intentions concerning R6RS

[Neil Jerram]

Elf <address@hidden> writes:

> (i usually start people off with guile nowadays,
> despite its non-r5 compliance, as the wizard book is still around r4 
> material.)

I hope you don't mind me emailing you in response to your r6rs post;
I'm one of the Guile developers.

I wondered if you could say more about the r5-non-compliance that you
perceive?  I thought we had solved all r5 compliance issues by now.

(Last time I heard it claimed that Guile was not r5-compliant, I
followed it up, and it was to do with a couple of tests relying on the
order of evaluation of letrec initializers.  But that is fixed now.)

Many thanks,
     Neil