Based on long experience, I am skeptical about the ability of language designers to adequately model operating system facilities without becoming operating system designers in the process, and usually failing to provide adequate access to the operating systems already in use.
I would be happy if Scheme-2 said "this is how we map to Posix.1 facilities", and very unhappy if they started deciding what a good networking interface looks like. My primary concern is that Scheme-1 shouldn't have any of this. I'm happy to see files removed from Scheme-1, but the backwards-compatibility expectations for Scheme-1 might make that implausible, and I'm content to see them stay. Thomas On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Larry D. Lee jr. <[email protected]> wrote: > I talked with John Cowan and sketched out my argument that, for > consistency, IPC operations should be handled the same as File > operations. > > Several IPC constructs, such as named pipes, are essentially files or > could be implemented as such. Any Implementation that provides access to > a system's filesystem should provide IPC support to remain consistent. > > Certain environments don't have filesystems, however, and Scheme should > still target those environments. Obviously Scheme's requirements can not > require support for something that doesn't exist in a targeted > environment. > > John Cowan, informed me that a proposal had be submitted to drop file > support from tiny Scheme and move it to WG2. > > This proposal makes sense. It would allow Scheme to be implemented in > environments that don't have filesystems, while ensuring that a standard > IPC library exists for those environments that do. > > Tiny scheme should drop support for file operations, and Extended scheme > should include support for IPC and socket operations. > > On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 13:52 -0400, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > Not for working group one they aren't. > > > > > > Not every scheme even HAS files or a filesystem around, let alone a > > network. Part of the charter for WG1 is embedded devices. > > > > > > And what about non-Unix systems? Are we going to mandate that if the > > OS has no sockets or pipes, it isn't Scheme? > > > > > > Thomas > > > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Larry Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > Are IPC functions under consideration? Sockets, pipes, etc are > > as integral as filesystem operations. > > > > "[email protected] " > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >Send Scheme-reports mailing list submissions to > > > [email protected] > > > > > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > > > > > http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports > > > > > >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > > [email protected] > > > > > >You can reach the person managing the list at > > > [email protected] > > > > > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more > > specific > > >than "Re: Contents of Scheme-reports digest..." > > > > > > > > >Today's Topics: > > > > > > 1. New features in WG1 Scheme (John Cowan) > > > > > > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > >Message: 1 > > >Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 23:42:11 -0400 > > >From: John Cowan <[email protected]> > > >Subject: [Scheme-reports] New features in WG1 Scheme > > >To: [email protected], > > > [email protected] > > >Message-ID: <[email protected]> > > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > > > >Here's a non-authoritative summary of the currently approved > > new features > > >in R7RS small Scheme: > > > > > > Lexical syntax: > > > > > >Inexact values +inf.0, -inf.0, and +nan.0. > > > > > >Escaped symbols with |...|. > > > > > >Named character escapes (short and long names) in strings. > > > > > >Numeric character escapes in strings and symbols. > > > > > >#; S-expression comments and #|...|# block comments. > > > > > > Syntax: > > > > > >Internal DEFINE-SYNTAX. > > > > > >LETREC* is added, and internal DEFINE is made to use it. > > > > > >Tail patterns, ellipsis escaping, ellipsis redefinition, and > > _ as wildcard > > >in syntax-rules. > > > > > > Modified procedures: > > > > > >MAP and FOR-EACH are allowed to take lists of unequal length, > > and stop > > >when the shortest list runs out. > > > > > >ASSOC and MEMBER take an optional third argument, the > > predicate to use. > > > > > > New procedures: > > > > > >random-integer, random-real, current-error-port, delete-file, > > >file-exists?, make-list, copy-list, list-set!, string-map, > > >string-for-each, string->vector, vector->string, copy-vector, > > >vector-map, vector-for-each, exact-integer?. > > exact-integer-sqrt, > > >finite?, nan?, error, syntax-error, open-input-string, > > >open-output-string, get-output-string, > > read-with-shared-structure, > > >write-with-shared-structure. > > > > > >-- > > >Values of beeta will give rise to dom! John Cowan > > >(5th/6th edition 'mv' said this if you tried > > http://www.ccil.org/~cowan > > >to rename '.' or '..' entries; see > > [email protected] > > >http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/odd.html) > > > > > > > > > > > >------------------------------ > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >Scheme-reports mailing list > > >[email protected] > > > > http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports > > > > > > > > >End of Scheme-reports Digest, Vol 10, Issue 1 > > >********************************************* > > _______________________________________________ > > Scheme-reports mailing list > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
