[r6rs-discuss] Which Schemes?

[Joe Marshall]

On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Aaron W. Hsu<arcfide at sacrideo.us> wrote:
>
> I don't think you can quantify the relative influence that any one Scheme
> has on the rest of the community. You might be able to make broad, rough
> classifications, but these would be hairy at best.

I only want a broad, rough classification.

> A number of Schemes have implemented R6RS, and among them are big names like
> PLT, Larceny, Chez, and Scheme48 (which, I believe has made a commitment to
> doing so, but I haven't seen this yet). On the other hand, a large number of
> Schemes have decidedly rejected R6RS, such as Gambit, Chicken, SCM, and MIT.

Yes, and this is the problem I'm hoping to understand and hoping that I can help
R7 avoid.  We won't get a complete consensus on what goes in to R7, but
I *hope* we can get all the `big names' aboard, and that if we do, it will be
of benefit to the community.

> I don't see the reason to worry about this partly classification above and
> beyond the general examination of which features have the largest consensus
> across all Scheme implementations.

That is what I'm trying to figure out.  What is a `large consensus'?
Certainly any consensus that doesn't include Gambit, Chicken, SCM
and MIT would be suspect.


>
>        Aaron W. Hsu
>
> --
> Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims
> may be the most oppressive. -- C. S. Lewis
>



-- 
~jrm