Hi Noah, On Sun 30 Jan 2011 17:08, Noah Lavine <noah.b.lav...@gmail.com> writes:
> My question is, what should I do to let other Scheme variants know > this is happening and get them involved? C.L.S, currently. It could be that there is a need for another forum, but I don't know. What tends to happen is that people that want to do this consider themselves Scheme programmers, first and foremost, and who do not identify themselves with one Scheme system; so they release their code on their own site, with info on using it with various systems, and send mails to the various implementation user lists. But it's rare for an implementer to be in this category. People who have the luxury of an implementation, if it's big enough, don't appear to _need_ standardization so much, so they don't work on it. > I could just post on a bunch of development mailing lists, but it > seemed like it would be better to have one list that handled that > (although maybe not). Scheme is fairly polychromatic right now, culturally. You might find it useful to interact with the various lists individually, and then come back and work on this. Otherwise you won't really know where people are coming from. For example, if you are interested in cooperation with Racket, the (very smart and experienced) Racket people will tell you their view of the world straight-up on their mailing lists, but are probably tired of getting into arguments with other worldviews on more general fora. Likewise you'd need something in R6RS for R6RS schemes. Et cetera. I don't mean to discourage more inter-Scheme cooperation. I like Scheme folks and Scheme implementations. I even like Racket :) I just mean to say that it's not just space, or lack thereof, that is a barrier to cooperation, it's culture. Successful cooperation is diplomacy, in the best sense of the word. Regards, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/