Re: [Scheme-reports] Just a load of.. well..

[Jussi Piitulainen <jpiitula@x>]

Biep writes:

>   Therefore I propose "Schemer" for small Scheme, and "Schemest" for
>   large Scheme.  The one name clearly indicates its roots, and the
>   other the fact that it is the maximal Scheme.  The name "Scheme"
>   would remain as the family name, and the report could be subtitled
>   "Scheme: Schemer, Schemest".

You've got this backwards. In keeping with the minimalist leanings of
Scheme, the Schemest language should be the tiny core: variables,
procedure calls, lambda, if, set!, call/cc, define, and a small number
of primitive types and procedures needed to do anything at all. A
false value, pairs, natural numbers, maybe. Proper tail calls.

Scheme would be the full language. Schemer would be the small language
in the middle, as Scheme would have been originally, at the time of
Actor, Conniver, and Planner, if a file system had allowed more than
six characters in a name. I think those names were also in all caps.

I don't see a real need to change the name now. Certainly not into all
caps.


_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports