On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Andre van Tonder<[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 8 Sep 2009, Alaric Snell-Pym wrote: > >> Some people say "things should be in the standard because they want to >> be able to use them" (sockets etc). I agree, we need a standard way to >> do sockets, but it needn't be in "core Scheme". It should be >> standardised in an SRFI, or maybe in "large Scheme". > > I am of the opinion that we don't need large Scheme at all. SRFIs > should be sufficient, if the process is properly conducted. Large > Scheme seems too heavyweight a process, and updates to it are > likely to be too intermittent, to fulfill the growing and changing > needs for useful libraries.
All of the discussions seem to be leaning towards this. The fight then will be about Unicode, case-sensitivity, modules, and records no? _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
