[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Version reference syntax is overly complex.

From: Aubrey Jaffer <agj>
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 12:31:24 -0400 (EDT)

 | Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 12:57:13 +0200
 | From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jens_Axel_S=F8gaard?= <jensaxel at soegaard.net>
 |
 | Shiro Kawai wrote:
 |
 | > Suggested alternative #2
 | > ------------------------
 | >
 | > Drop the whole library versioning idea from r6rs.
 |
 | In the case where you distribute your program including
 | all used libraries, versions aren't terrible important.
 |
 | However, if a library outside your control is updated,
 | then it is better to get a library version error than
 | some random runtime error.

I disagree. My program may use only one procedure from the changed
library; chances are good that the change wouldn't affect the
procedure it uses. Or the library change may have been done in a
manner which is backwards compatible (eg. added new procedures).

We shouldn't be arguing from first principles when we have long
experience with multi-module Scheme libraries -- SLIB is a Scheme
library where nearly all module changes are backward compatible.
Modules with substantial, incompatible API differences are given
different module names.

The library error you suggest would cause my programs to stop working
when they would have otherwise worked correctly. R6RS would be the
language of gratuitious library errors.
Received on Sun Jun 17 2007 - 12:31:24 UTC