On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 11:48:03AM -0400, Peter Gavin wrote:
> On 9/20/06, Dave Herman <dherman_at_ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>> Submitter's name: Dave Herman
>> Submitter's email address: dherman_at_ccs.neu.edu
>> Type of issue: Enhancement
>> Priority: Major
>> R6RS component: Libraries
>> Version of the report: 5.91
>> One-sentence summary of the issue: R6RS library syntax should include a
>> standard format for importing SRFI libraries.
>>
>> RATIONALE
>>
>> In the interest of portability, programmers should be able to rely
>> on a common format for importing SRFI's from any implementations
>> that support them.
>
> One question: Is a new SRFI sequence going to be started for R6RS,
> or is the original sequence going to be kept? I'm just wondering
> because it seems that R6RS will obsolete most of the original SRFIs.
R6RS doesn't obsolete *all* existing SRFIs (AFAIK), so starting a new
SRFI sequence would require all the non-obsoleted SRFIs to be
resubmitted / copied to the new sequence.
One approach would be to modify existing (and future) SRFIs to
explicitly state which language standards (currently R5RS, R6RS, both
or neither) it applies to.
An alternative would be for R6RS to explicitly state "this section
obsoletes SRFI n", and to guarantee that attempting to import an
obsoleted SRFI would either 1) throw a condition; or 2) have no
effect.
--
Trent Buck, Student Errant
Received on Sat Sep 30 2006 - 22:46:21 UTC