Re: r6rs incompatibilities

[Andy Wingo]

Hi,

On Fri 21 May 2010 14:47, Julian Graham <address@hidden> writes:

>>  * The R6RS specifies many situations in which a conforming
>>   implementation must signal a specific error. Guile doesn't really
>>   care about that too much -- if a correct R6RS program would not hit
>>   that error, we don't bother checking for it.
>
> In a lot of these cases, that's because our libraries simply re-export
> bindings from Guile's core library or an SRFI.  Instead of changing
> the error-signaling of the original procedures, we could wrap them a
> bit more in the relevant libraries to add argument validation, say, or
> to re-throw Guile's core errors as R6RS exceptions.

Sure; we'll probably take them case-by-case, accomodating where it makes
sense and documenting the incompatibility where it doesn't. It's not
like Guile's exception protocol is particularly well-thought-out :P

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/