[r6rs-discuss] r6rs is 'perfect'
matthias at ccs.neu.edu
Tue Oct 30 12:10:33 EDT 2007
On Oct 30, 2007, at 10:50 AM, Pascal Costanza wrote:
> On 30 Oct 2007, at 15:28, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>> It is amusing to read these debates though I don't think
>> it is productive in any way. Why don't we all spend time
>> on producing R6RS or ERRR5RS compliant Scheme implementations
>> and then use the feedback from these efforts to move forward?
> My impression is that some people think that R6RS already got a
> number of fundamental design decisions wrong, even though they
> could have be gotten right already. I guess it's not motivating to
> fix conceptual bugs that, in their view, shouldn't be there in the
> first place.
You are possibly right. But I am such an imperfect being that I
actually need to get my hand on runnable code (i.e., work with a
language and have others work with a language) before I can make such
judgments. Back to code -- Matthias
More information about the r6rs-discuss