[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] "unspecified values"
20 minutes ago, Alaric Snell-Pym wrote:
> On 05/22/11 22:53, Andre van Tonder wrote:
> > But if WG1-voted decisions are written in stone as you say, then
> > it makes little sense for this discussion group to even continue.
> > What was the point then of making the draft public? I will
> > henceforth stop my "moaning"/participation here. I wish you good
> > luck.
> No! Don't do that!
> By all means vent frustration by shouting at each other, but don't
> let that get in the way of working together to make Scheme great.
> Fatalism and anger will only lead to R7RS just being another R6RS -
> swinging too far to the other extreme, driven by rage and bile.
Do you realize that Andre has poured *tons* of efforts on r6rs? I
somehow doubt that characterizing it as "driven by rage and bile" is
going to make him happy.
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
Scheme-reports mailing list