Eli,
Thank you for pointing out what everyone should already know. :-)
I did not vote in favor of R6RS, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't
consider R6RS as the latest and most comprehensive standard to date from
which we may examine the issue of a "Large Scheme." The editors knew what
they were doing, even if the end result had to be a large compromise. And
this isn't a cultural thing. It is in bad form to ignore the current
literature out there on an issue and treat it as if it didn't existt. Only
marketing tricksters who try to sell an inferior product need to do such
things.
Sincerely,
Aaron W. Hsu
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 14:22:01 -0400, Eli Barzilay <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sep 8, Andre van Tonder wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Sep 2009, Eli Barzilay wrote:
>>
>> > Did crack become popular in the Scheme circles?
>> >
>> > (In other words: did you check the title of the mailing list
>> > you're using?)
>>
>> The mailing list has been repurposed somewhat. The discussion has
>> not been about R6 for a while now.
>
> 1. Yes, I didn't complain about off-topic messages. It's a few
> hundred messages too late.
>
> 2. This whole thing about pretending that r6rs never existed *is* what
> I'm complaining about. It's a huge amount of work, and in my view
> the explicit way in which it is ignored is:
> - disrespectful to the people who have worked hard on it. (I'm not
> a native English speaker, and I'm not from a local culture, so
> this might be a bad choice of words, and perhaps it's just me
> that looks at it as something so *rude*.)
> - not in line with the SC texts, that mention compatibility with
> "IEEE, R5RS, and R6RS standards".
> - surreal when the original text gets to:
> | Hash tables really are ripe for a standard.
> because
> - hash tables *were* standardized;
> - in a document that is mentioned *explicitly* in both WG
> charters;
> - in a part of it that was rarely mentioned in any criticism (for
> example, most mentions in the texts accompanying negative r6rs
> votes complain about having hash tables in the standard --
> something that the OP clearly has no problems with);
> - and in case anyone could have genuinely forget that, then it is
> mentioned in the subject line of every post and it is part of
> the email address that is used.
>
--
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
