I completely agree with Elf. And Small scheme can just be scheme, and large scheme can be scheme-stdlib.
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Elf<[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 > _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
