Alan Manuel Gloria:
> There is currently an R7RS standardization process on-going. Would it
> be appropriate for us to essentially barge in with the idea that the
> reserved {...} can now be committed to curly-infix?
>
> curly-infix seems to be the least controversial and most stable part
> of the spec.
Absolutely. I don't know what the best timing is, but the whole point is to
get it widely adopted. I created tiers specifically so it could be adopted in
chunks, and you're right, curly-infix is the easiest.
One challenge is that, while it's implemented, it's not (yet) adopted by an
implementation. But from the point-of-view of consistency, we could argue that
*now* is the time, before everyone does something different and incompatible.
> I wonder what the process is for putting in a new idea in the current
> R7RS discussion.
I'm sure there's a submission process. It might be useful to quietly talk to
one or two current participants, to get an idea of how this particular group
"works", so that we can present things in the way they prefer.
Does anyone on the mailing list have any knowledge of how the R7RS group
prefers to work, or any other suggestions?
--- David A. Wheeler
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Readable-discuss mailing list
Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
