Re: *current-language*

[Andy Wingo]

On Tue 06 Dec 2011 01:36, Noah Lavine <address@hidden> writes:

>> I guess in general I'd prefer something like Racket's #!lang directives,
>> though I'm not opposed to this approach.  Dunno!
>
> How about using language directives when available, and trying to
> guess the language when not?

I'm fine with this, FWIW.

> And about the directives, what should they be? ',language' is what we
> used to use at the REPL, and I was about to write an email arguing for
> that, until I realized that there is one big advantage to using the
> same thing as Racket - we might actually share some languages.

,language would be pretty cute, but I don't think it would work, as it
reads as (unquote language), and who knows what the binding of `unquote'
would be.

> Specifically, if someone had a Scheme file that started with '#!lang
> r5rs', it's possible that Guile and Racket could both run that file
> without modification. That seems pretty cool.

Yes, I agree, that would be nice.  Perhaps we could even convince other
implementations that this is the right thing.

> Mixing other languages could be scary though.

Indeed :)

Regards,

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/