From: Lassi Kortela <lassi@lassi.io>
To: Arvydas Silanskas <nma.arvydas.silanskas@gmail.com>
Cc: Sascha Ziemann <ceving@gmail.com>,
kawa mailing list <kawa@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Time for a new release? 3.1.2?
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2023 12:51:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <33b5d947-f54a-3128-8d1e-e7ca85a75d3c@lassi.io> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPh7weAPj-zfSRgYLf4dcMAAGekpu8kUoBqbZATpuhXF+cz9VA@mail.gmail.com>
> The way I understand the r7rs-large process, is that it tries to split
> out low floor difficulty / portable concerns (eg., streams) from high
> floor difficulty / not-portable concerns (syntax-case, etc), so that
> implementations could choose to implement some but not all of it, to
> extent that is feasible
Modularity is the only way forward for RnRS.
> (I wasn't there when it happened, but my
> understanding of r6rs controversies was mostly to do with implementers
> getting handed uncompromising burden of implementation requirements).
The disagreements are about style as well as complexity.
> In that view, it seems sensible to me to have both specific procedures now
> and plausibly generic procedures later. Also, specific procedures enable
> more deterministic optimization opportunities. Number system is generic
> in the standard, but we also have eg. srfi 143 providing non-generic
> procedures with "allow more efficient implementations" stated as the
> core reasoning.
Yes. R6RS also added fixnum procedures.
The existing specific procedures have to be kept for backward
compatibility. Whether new ones should be added is another matter.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-09 10:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-28 17:53 Duncan Mak
2022-09-29 4:38 ` Per Bothner
2022-09-29 15:18 ` Arvydas Silanskas
2022-10-03 11:36 ` Arvydas Silanskas
2022-10-21 9:01 ` Arvydas Silanskas
2022-10-27 4:50 ` Shawn Wagner
2022-12-06 9:07 ` Arvydas Silanskas
2023-01-05 21:34 ` Per Bothner
2023-01-05 22:02 ` Damien Mattei
2023-01-06 12:16 ` Lassi Kortela
2023-01-08 18:11 ` Sascha Ziemann
2023-01-09 9:03 ` Lassi Kortela
2023-01-09 9:42 ` Arvydas Silanskas
2023-01-09 10:51 ` Lassi Kortela [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=33b5d947-f54a-3128-8d1e-e7ca85a75d3c@lassi.io \
--to=lassi@lassi.io \
--cc=ceving@gmail.com \
--cc=kawa@sourceware.org \
--cc=nma.arvydas.silanskas@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).