[R6RS] Re: Less verbose type definition form

[Michael Sperber]

"Manuel Serrano" <Manuel.Serrano at sophia.inria.fr> writes:

> As far as I have understood, Marc tried to make a counter-proposal
> because, I think, he does not like the one you have proposed. Marc
> (and I) have tried to say to we consider the syntax important. We have
> also showed that it exits at least two persons that don't like your
> syntax, at all.  I'm sorry to see that you don't consider
> this "helpful". I'm sorry to see that you don't consider the Marc's
> proposal "helpful". I'm actually not sure that I could add something 
> "helpful" on this subject...

Well, how about responding to one of the posts I indicated?  For
example, it would be helpful if you said what your take is on the
changes to the syntax Kent suggested.  You might also try to convince
the editors that conciseness should be a requirement for the syntactic
layer, preferably specifying what that means exactly.

The problem with "I don't like your syntax" is that we'll probably
never agree on a syntax everybody likes, especially as we envision
using the record facility in different ways.  (I "don't like" Marc's
syntax, and I don't even especially "like" the one in the draft *for
my own purposes*, but at least the one in the draft meets the goals
and constraints we posed, wherease Marc's does not, or at least hasn't
been demonstrated to.)  I "don't like" the Unicode syntax, and I
probably "won't like" a lot of other stuff that will be proposed, but
as far as holding up somebody else's proposal is concerned, I'll try
to stick to the things that are important, namely the R5RS preamble
and the requirements, as they are formulated.

We charged Kent with coming up with a syntax based on the one he
presented at the meeting.  If he doesn't have the autonomy to do even
that (and there are precious little liberties with the syntax as
compared with what Kent proposed at the meeting), we'll get stalled on
everything from now on, and authors charged up with writing up
something will be thoroughly discouraged.

Are you willing to deadlock the records issue over the syntax?  If so,
how do you envision we'll arrive at a records proposal for R6RS?

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla