Merging R6RS libraries?

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hello!

Looking at messages on guile-commits, I’m really amazed by the amount of
work that Julian has been doing on the R6RS front.  Now that all this
code is here, I don’t see any reason not to include it in 2.0.

Here’s a random list of things that I think should be considered.

  - What’s the status of your work wrt. to R6RS-lib?

  - Do you plan to work on the remaining parts, in particular the
    dreaded (to me) ‘(rnrs io ports)’?  :-)

  - Does the code borrow snippets from reference implementations or some
    such?

  - How much code do unit tests cover?  It’d be nice to try the test
    suite of the PLT folks,
    
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.scheme/browse_thread/thread/a7d691b5ca87b94f/6bb6e09f1d39d828>.

  - Are there any known problems with the library/module integration, or
    pitfalls that ought to be documented?

  - In terms of documentation, we definitely don’t want to duplicate
    R6RS.  However, it would be nice to have at least a node listing the
    available libraries and what they’re about.  For those that provide
    features not available elsewhere in Guile, it’d be nice to have more
    detailed documentation (we’ve done that for bytevectors and I/O
    ports).

Julian: would you like review on specific parts of your work?  (I
personally don’t have much time to dedicate to it these days but I could
look at things you think are important.)

What do you think?

Is it reasonable to add it to the to-do list of 2.0?

Thanks,
Ludo’.