My own thoughts: I don't think the committee is correct in their assessment in a few vital ways, though this may be more due to wording than intent.
PLT, popularly believed to be one of the drivers behind R6, is primarily used 'for education'. It's also one of the largest schemes out there in terms of size and complexity. Larceny, on the other hand, I believe was for use and testing, and is fairly small. The distinction between 'for education' and 'for real world' is not as clear as a 'small' vs 'large' scheme. I think that the correct approach would be for a small scheme with standard libraries. The key concept here is the plural of library. If we view SRFIs as akin to RFCs, we can view the standard libs as akin to RFCs that have completed the standard-track (STD). Instead of being a 'large scheme' vs a 'small scheme', a single scheme with both a process for fully standardised libraries/interfaces and the means to support it would be preferable. Just my 2c. -elf On Thu, 20 Aug 2009, Marc Feeley wrote: > [Apologies if you get duplicates of this message.] > > This message is being posted to various lists to inform members of the > Scheme community on the activities of the Scheme Language Steering > Committee which is overseeing the process of Scheme language > evolution. > > A website has been setup to publish various documents pertaining to > our activities. The steering committee will be presenting and > discussing these documents at the Scheme workshop on August 22. Our > hope is that by publishing them now, a more fruitful question period > will ensue at the workshop. > > The website URL is: http://www.scheme-reports.org/ > > The documents being published today are: > > 1) The amended Scheme Language Steering Committee charter. > > 2) The steering committee's position statement on Scheme language > evolution. > > 3) A draft of the working group meta charter, that describes how > working groups are run. > > 4) A draft of the charter for working group 1, which will > be involved in the elaboration of a specification for > a "small" Scheme language. > > 5) A draft of the charter for working group 2, which will > be involved in the elaboration of a specification for > a "large" Scheme language. > > If you would like to comment on these documents, we urge you to come > to the Scheme workshop and/or to send email to the steering committee > at this address: [email protected] . > > Will Clinger > Marc Feeley > Chris Hanson > Jonathan Rees > Olin Shivers > > > _______________________________________________ > r6rs-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss > _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
