[R6RS] Re: issue straw poll
dyb at cs.indiana.edu
dyb at cs.indiana.edu
Wed Oct 25 19:42:56 EDT 2006
Here are my votes...I think we're still waiting for Anton and Matthew.
Kent
--------
6 Applicable record instances
Should we add them?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
7 Additional LAZY primitive for delayed evaluation
Should we add it?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): M
9 backslash-linefeed
Should we allow <intraline whitespace> between the \ and <linefeed>
in \<linefeed><intraline whitespace>?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
10 #;<datum> comments useless
Should we flush?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
11 NaN is not a real number
Should we make (real? <any NaN>) #f?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
12 R6RS library syntax should include a standard format for importing SRFI libraries
Should we do this?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): M
14 <hex scalar value> should allow only 6 digits
Should we limit to 6 digits?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
Should we eliminate restriction on number of digits?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): Y
17 "An exception might be raised" considered confusing
Change to "An exception should not be raised"?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): M
18 String exit codes should be allowed
Should we allow them?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): M
22 U+0085 is whitespace
Should we make U+0085 whitespace?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): M
25 "forall" and "exists" should use SRFI-1 equivalents
Should we rename?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
26 Map and for-each should work even if lists are of unequal length
Should we make this change?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
27 Some generic arithmetic procedures should be put in a library
Should we do this?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
36 Ambiguous call/cc-behaviour of list operations
Should we make the benavior unambiguous?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): M
38 Position-significance of declarations in scripts
Should we allow them only at the front of a script body?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): Y
39 Script-body differences
Should we make script bodies like library/lambda bodies?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): Y
Should we make library/lambda bodies like script bodies?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
40 Exactness is orthogonal to type
Should we eliminate statement that exactness is orthogonal to type?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
Should we eliminate sections 16.5 "exact arithmetic" and 16.6 "inexact arithmetic"
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): M
42 Requirement to detect circular lists
Should we eliminate this requirement?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
45 last-element behavior of for-each
Specify return value of for-each to be the unspecified value?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
46 LF should not be the only line separator
Specify larger set of line separators?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): M
47 Add (sort) and (vector-sort!) procedures
Should we add them?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): M
49 Higher-order procedures should not interfere with exceptions
Should we prohibit this "interference"?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
51 Conflating programs and scripts
Add a separate notion of program?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
Remove <script header> from scripts?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): N
52 Exact-Integer and Real (and Complex) are more useful distinctions than Exact and Inexact
Adopt SRFI-94 and flush 16.5 "exact arithmetic" and 16.6 "inexact arithmetic"?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): M
58 only 'big' and 'little' as endiannness may not be enough
Should we add others or allow extensions?
yes/maybe/no (Y/M/N): M
More information about the R6RS
mailing list