On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 16:09:30 -0400, Joe Marshall <[email protected]>
wrote:
> They can in the sense that I am referring to. If PLT, MIT, Gauche,
> Guile, Chicken, Bigloo,
> Gambit, Larceny, Scheme48, SCM, JScheme and Kawa all decided to adopt
> some
> particular feature, you can bet the rest would soon follow. If SXM,
> VSCM, S7, SIOD,
> Iron Scheme and dfsch were to adopt some particular feature, it would
> be far less
> certain that the rest would soon follow.
I don't think you can quantify the relative influence that any one Scheme
has on the rest of the community. You might be able to make broad, rough
classifications, but these would be hairy at best.
A number of Schemes have implemented R6RS, and among them are big names
like PLT, Larceny, Chez, and Scheme48 (which, I believe has made a
commitment to doing so, but I haven't seen this yet). On the other hand, a
large number of Schemes have decidedly rejected R6RS, such as Gambit,
Chicken, SCM, and MIT.
Obviously there are some well known Schemes, and going to the Scheme
Workshop, you can see who is doing what pretty clearly. But I mean, so
what? I don't see the reason to worry about this partly classification
above and beyond the general examination of which features have the
largest consensus across all Scheme implementations.
Aaron W. Hsu
--
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. -- C. S. Lewis
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
