[r6rs-discuss] Proposed features for small Scheme, part 1: a stake in the ground
cowan at ccil.org
Thu Sep 3 23:41:34 EDT 2009
Aaron W. Hsu scripsit:
> I'm already suspicious here. Why do we need to add all this stuff in?
We don't *need* to add anything. We don't *need* anything we have now,
> I'm not convinced that it makes a difference whether a feature is
> implementable or not in the Small Scheme. If we create a standard feature
> or library of things that aren't easily implemented in Small Scheme, why
> should we then put them in Small Scheme?
Because they are ripe for standardization. Please read either Joe
Marshall's magnificent defense of what and how to standardize, or else my
rather limping remarks to much the same effect in reply to David van Horn.
> I don't see the goal of Thing One
> as being the lowest set of features through which all other features might
> be implemented.
Neither do I. However, if a primitive is present, you can experiment
with different components built on it.
> It might be nice to distinguish core features or Small Scheme
> features as being those which usefully permit the creation of many
> other features, or which form a small, minimally useful basis for
> programming, but I don't see why we should add things in here just
> because they are hard to implement in Thing One.
It's the other way about. If a set of useful procedures is large and
easily implemented (like SRFI-1), we can safely leave it out.
> > [SRFI 8] receive
> Why would we need to do this? This is easy to implement.
Assoc is easy to implement. List is easy to implement. We have them
because they're expected and useful. So is receive.
[many comments to the same effect snipped]
> > [SRFI 45] lazy
> Eh....Again...I'm not seeing why this belongs in a core Scheme?
If you believe in force and delay, this fixes a bug around force-delay
combination vs. tail recursion, redefining force and delay in the process.
> I want any module system introduced in core Scheme to be absolutely
> compatible with a larger module system used as the standard everywhere.
So do I. I'm not sure, though, exactly what that means.
"The serene chaos that is Courage, and the phenomenon cowan at ccil.org
of Unopened Consciousness have been known to the John Cowan
Great World eons longer than Extaboulism."
"Why is that?" the woman inquired.
"Because I just made that word up", the Master said wisely.
--Kehlog Albran, The Profit http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
More information about the r6rs-discuss