[R6RS] my notes on today's conference call (3 May 2006)

[William D Clinger]

Conference call May 3 2006 12:45pm
All present by about 12:47pm:
Kent, Anton, Will, Mike, Matthew

No electronic agenda

Agenda is the omnibus vote list.

Action items from last week:

email omnibus vote list
    done
comment on arithmetic SRFI
    lack of comment will be taken as assent
conditions
    should schedule another big vote on them
email final enumerations proposal
    not done yet
withdraw Unicode SRFI
    not completely done, but begun
macros note
    sent
macros reference implementation
    not done
continue refining core language
    ongoing
refine library spec to allow subsetting
    not done yet

****************************************************************

Will asked to change his votes on issues 22, 26, 34 to

22. modify quasiquote to support Alan Bawden's PEPM '99 nested quasiquote
    extensions

    Vote: yes


26. add cond-expand (SRFI 0)

    Vote: no


34. Should the character comparison predicates be required to be:
    A. n-ary
    B. binary
 
    Vote: A

If accepted, these changes would make for a unanimous
vote on those three issues.

These changes were accepted.

****************************************************************

Will made a motion to consider issue 33 before issue 1.
The motion failed for lack of a second.

Kent asked for a motion to combine issues 1, 2, 3, and 33.

Matthew moved that option D be added to issue 1:
    D. require return of new unspecified value
Anton seconded.
Will, Kent, and Mike voted no.

Matthew moved that option B of issue 1 be changed to:
    B. require return of some specific value
Will seconded.
Kent, Matthew, Will, Anton voted yes.
Mike abstains.
Motion passes.

****************************************************************

Revotes on issues that were not settled by electronic vote.

vote order: Clinger, Dybvig, Flatt, Sperber, van Straaten

1.  unspecified value, three options:
    A. leave as in r5rs: set!, set-car!, etc., return unspecified value
    B. require return of some specific value
    C. require return of zero values

    Vote: A, B, B, C, B

    Outcome: B

33. call the new void value, if we choose option B on Vote 1:
    A. "unspecific value"
    B. "void value"
    C. "unspecified"

    Vote: C (by acclamation)

    Outcome: C

2.  add (unspecified) constructor if we choose option B on Vote 1

    Vote: no, yes, yes, yes, yes

    Outcome: yes

3.  add #!unspecified syntax if we choose option B on Vote 1

    Vote: no, no, no, no, no

    Outcome; no

7.  add graph printing: #n= marks datum, #n# references

    Vote: no, yes, no, no, no

    Outcome: no

10. add when and unless forms:

    (when e0 e1 e2 ...) => (if e0 (begin e1 e2 ...) <unspecified value>)
    (unless e0 e1 e2 ...) => (if e0 <unspecified value> (begin e1 e2 ...))

    Vote: no, yes, yes, no, yes

    Outcome: yes (but put them in some library, not in core)

12. add call/cc as an "official" abbreviation for call-with-current-continuation

    Vote: no, yes, yes, no, yes

    Outcome: yes

13. add rec form:

    (rec id e) => (letrec ([id e]) id)

    Vote: no, yes, no, no, no

    Outcome: no

14. add #n( vector prefix:

    Examples: #5(0 1 2 3 4) equiv. #(0 1 2 3 4)
              #8(0 1 2 3 4) equiv. #(0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7)
              #1000(#f) equiv. #(#f #f ... #f)  [ 1000 #f's ]

    Vote: no, yes, no, no, no

    Outcome: no

16. allow write to use #n( prefix

    Vote: no, yes, abstain, no, abstain

    Outcome: no longer relevant

[Re issue 18, case-lambda should go in a library.]

Mike moved that we table issues 19 and 20 pending more systematic
consideration of SRFI-1.
Will seconded.
Passed by acclamation.

23. mvbinding construct names, three options:
    A. let-values and let*-values
    B. let-values and let-values*
    C. mvlet and mvlet*

    Vote: A, C, A, A, A

    Outcome: A

25. add support for formatted output

    Vote: no, no, no, yes, no

    Outcome: no (decided in conference call last week)

28. make () self-evaluating
    A. () evaluates to empty list
    B. () raises a &syntax exception

    Vote: B, abstain, B, A, B

    Outcome: B

Will moves that Will writes rationale for sealed records,
and issue 35 be tabled.
Matthew seconded.
Motion passed by acclamation.

36. As with quoted constants, an implementation is allowed to create a
    new type each time the same define-record-type form is evaluated or to
    treat the type as a constant value, so that, for example:

      (let ((f (lambda (x) (define-record-type r ---) (if x r? (make-r ---)))))
        ((f #t) (f #f)))

    may return either #t or #f.

    Should we:
    A. leave it like it is
    B. require the descriptor to be recreated each time
    C. require the descriptor to treated as a constant

    Vote: B, C, B, B, B

    Outcome: B

38. The specification of make-record-type-descriptor has this:

    If parent is not #f, and uid is not #f, and the parent is generative
    (i.e.  its uid is #f), an error is signalled.

    Should this restriction be lifted?

    Vote: yes, yes, yes, yes, yes

    Outcome: yes

****************************************************************

For next week, Will will write up the conditions list as a list
of numbered issues.

Also SRFI-1, if anyone has time.

Adjourned around 1:43pm.

Will