[R6RS] my notes on today's conference call (5 April 2006)
William D Clinger
will at ccs.neu.edu
Wed Apr 5 14:06:44 EDT 2006
Conference call April 5 2006 12:45pm
All present by about 12:47pm:
Kent, Anton, Matthew, Will, Mike
Matthew will not be available next Wednesday
Tuesday at 12:30pm might work
0. finalize agenda (1 minute)
no changes
1. action items from 3/29/2006 (5 minutes)
- read syntax-case SRFI for 4/5 meeting (All)
- propose library modifications to allow subsetting, supersetting,
defining new libraries, and to allow for lexical syntax extensions
or future changes (Anton, Matthew, Kent)
not done yet
- propose enumeration mechanism to replace ad-hoc enumerations in
the I/O, binary SRFIs (Mike)
proposed
- propose a better name than ``blob'' for byte-addressible octet vectors
(Anton)
bytes
- complete proposed list of libraries (Anton)
not done yet
- carried over:
- look over proposed condition hierarchy and details (All)
to be discussed electronically
2. syntax-case macros (20 minutes)
no reference implementation yet
opacity of syntax objects
three reasonable positions:
opaque, no exceptions, as in PLT Scheme
list structure except for identifiers, as in SRFI 72
allow both of the above extremes and everything between
would probably create portability problems
but we might have those problems anyway if something
like SRFI 72 becomes a popular alternative
specification needs to be more precise from user's perspective
matching described using list structure, not syntax objects
marks mentioned only at end of section 3.1:
"Hygiene is enforced by attaching a fresh mark to the
output of the introduced portions of each transformer
result...."
one mark per introduced portion? or same mark to all?
when syntax is used, or when transformer returns?
what about recursive transformers, with multiple returns?
marks never used to describe semantics of anything:
matching of identifiers (but see literal-identifier=?)
literal-identifier=?
bound-identifier=? and free-identifier=? described in terms
of bound and free identifiers, but bound and free with
respect to what?
probably need both:
a formal semantics for language lawyers and implementors
an informal description for programmers, who can refer to
the formal semantics in hard cases or ask a lawyer
or ask an implementation
potential interactions with help procedures
make precise semantics even more important
3. eval: flush from or adapt for r6rs?
for next week:
process and schedule
library split
eval and load
4. adjourned about 1:43pm
More information about the R6RS
mailing list