From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay7-d.mail.gandi.net (relay7-d.mail.gandi.net [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc4:8::227]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89BE73858D28 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2023 12:16:10 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 89BE73858D28 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lassi.io Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lassi.io Received: (Authenticated sender: lassi@lassi.io) by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9EEE20002; Fri, 6 Jan 2023 12:16:07 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <20b2efef-24af-ff6f-6591-db5c695a7d74@lassi.io> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2023 14:16:06 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1 Subject: Re: Time for a new release? 3.1.2? To: Per Bothner , Arvydas Silanskas Cc: kawa mailing list References: <0aee6f41-9f36-e9ef-6761-e8d81a3b5f5f@bothner.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Lassi Kortela In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: > I think the R7RS-large process is off-track, and is unlikely to reach > any useful destination > without a fundamental course-correction. Piling on more and more > different-but-similar > libraries is not the way to do a programming language in the 21st > century.  Even Common Lisp > realized that different differently-named functions for every useful > data-type is not > good language design. > > Scheme needs some way to define "interfaces"/"traits" that multiple > data-types > can implement. Many Scheme implementations (including Kawa) have that, > but a > general portable solution is highly desired.  Without that, there is no > point > in piling on more and more libraries for more and more data types. > > I am not the only one who feels this way, as you can see from the > SRFI/R7RS mailing lists. Thank you for saying this, Per. Agreed on all counts. We just had another round of discussions on the SRFI lists. Like the earlier ones, it went nowhere. The core group cannot examine its own flaws. I'm leaving and starting alternatives.