[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot

Peter Bex scripsit:

> Just declaring a grab-bag of libraries as "standardized" isn't going
> to work, especially considering the current tendency is towards
> marginalizing many Scheme implementations by doing things like
> declaring Unicode and the full numeric tower as mandatory.

If you're thinking about Chicken, then it's important to realize that
the default mode does not have to be the standard-compliant mode.
Until recently, Chibi's default was R5RS+ rather than R7RS-small;
Racket's default is #lang racket, which doesn't comply with any specific
Scheme standard; Gambit doesn't support R5RS macros unless you load the
syntax-rules library; and so on.

Here's the current list of Schemes that support the full numeric and
character towers:  Racket, Gauche, MIT, Gambit, Chicken (with eggs),
Scheme48/scsh, Kawa, Chibi, Guile, Chez, Vicare, Larceny, Ypsilon, Mosh,
IronScheme, STklos, KSi.  In addition, the Java/CLR based Schemes (other
than Kawa) almost do: they support characters up to U+FFFF.

> I also agree with Wingo's remarks: this standard is just a bunch of
> folks who like to quibble about language esoterics,

This judgement is grossly premature to say the least.

> instead of implementors who know their stuff, and have a feeling
> for the way standards can help or hinder implementation and
> experimentation.

Standards are not the place for experimentation, I agree.

> The scope is also way too large, which means people like me won't
> have the energy to keep up with all proposals; by the end, the only
> people left will be those with nothing better to do than argue about
> standards.

Hence the "drop in, drop out" policy.  People can join whenever they get
interested, and stop voting (since abstentions do not count either for
or against a proposal).

> This is turning out to be truly "design by committee".  I'm also going
> to stop participating in this standardization effort.

Well, that's a pity.  We could certainly use your input.

John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan@x
Original line from The Warrior's Apprentice by Lois McMaster Bujold:
"Only on Barrayar would pulling a loaded needler start a stampede toward one."
English-to-Russian-to-English mangling thereof: "Only on Barrayar you risk to
lose support instead of finding it when you threat with the charged weapon."

Scheme-reports mailing list