On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Abdulaziz Ghuloum <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Since the time R6RS was being discussed, available memory
> has more than doubled.  By the time R7RS is finalized (if
> ever), memory would at least quadruple again.  This is
> why I asked John about how many years he's been using the
> "space efficiency" argument; to me, that argument has been
> obsolete about 2 years after I've first heard it.
>

I'm sure there are those who will want to see R7RS on their PDP-10 or
Amiga 2000. :)

Seriously, though, assuming that the primary use case for your
language will be desktop or server PC's is folly. As others have
pointed out, there are still plenty of places where every byte counts.

(Imho it is not the place for a Scheme standard to specify how strings
will be implemented, but rather to specify the semantics of their
interface, and leave implementation details up to the implementors.)

--Jeff

_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss

Reply via email to