Scheme - R6RS Features

Author

R6RS Features

David Rush

2007-08-01, 7:13 pm

Hi all,

Outside of Andre's libraries, just how widely implemented are the
various features of R6RS? What implementations can I go to to work
with which? At the moment I am doing rather a lot of Scheme
development and I would like to actually try out the R6RS world before
I vote, ya know?

david rush

William D Clinger

2007-08-01, 10:12 pm

This message should not be misinterpreted as an endorsement
of the current draft R6RS, which I oppose.

David Rush wrote:
> Outside of Andre's libraries, just how widely implemented are the
> various features of R6RS? What implementations can I go to to work
> with which?

I won't try to talk about other implementations, but Larceny v0.94
(Doomsday Device) combined with Andre van Tonder's implementation
of libraries, programs, and syntax-case provide most of the major
features that have been proposed for the R6RS: lexical syntax,
base syntax, syntax-case, and these libraries: base, unicode,
bytevectors, procedural and inspection layers for records, io ports,
io simple, files, mutable-pairs, mutable-strings, r5rs.

The procedural records and io ports libraries are more complete
in the current development version, which you can build from
source [1], than in the pre-built v0.94 [2].

The R6RS features missing from Larceny v0.94 are numerous but
fairly routine [3]. We relied on Andre for libraries and
syntax-case, and implemented the other hard parts for v0.94
or soon afterwards.

Will

[1] http://larceny.ccs.neu.edu/trac/
[2] http://larceny.ccs.neu.edu/
[3] http://larceny.ccs.neu.edu/larceny-...i/CurrentStatus

Ray Dillinger

2007-08-18, 7:11 pm

Eeegh.

I just downloaded the candidate standard and pasted it all into
a text file so I can search and crossreference with it -- and
the formatting turns it into freakin' gobbledegook!

Every doublequote, quote, and backquote in the whole thing,
plus a bunch of other characters whose distinctions are crucial,
is rendered as something outside the ascii range!

D'you guys think it might just possibly have been a disservice
to the community to produce a document scattered across more
than a dozen pages, whose readability depends on NOT putting
it in an easily-searchable (Single-page) form and which also
requires people to retain all formatting information, so it
can't easily be pasted to usenet, unformatted email, etc?
D'you think maybe making it anything other than ultra-accessible
to all systems was too clever by half?

Conversely, is it the intent of the committee that a unicode
editor is now required to edit program code, and that the
ascii doublequote, apostrophe-quote, and backquote are now
no longer part of the language?

Bear
dragging out unicode crap to deal with
it, under protest...

Jens Axel Søgaard

2007-08-18, 7:11 pm

Ray Dillinger wrote:
> Eeegh.
>
> I just downloaded the candidate standard and pasted it all into
> a text file so I can search and crossreference with it -- and
> the formatting turns it into freakin' gobbledegook!

Tex2Page isn't that easy to use. When the tex-source
is made public, you'll have the opportunity to hack it
in order to generate other output formats.

--
Jens Axel Søgaard

Ray Dillinger

2007-08-18, 10:19 pm

Ray Dillinger wrote:
> Eeegh.
>
> I just downloaded the candidate standard and pasted it all into
> a text file so I can search and crossreference with it -- and
> the formatting turns it into freakin' gobbledegook!

As it turns out, even with a unicode editor, it's still gobbledegook
in some fairly important parts: there are some fairly critical bits of
text that are included as _graphics_!

IOW, when you all were doing searches and crossreferences earlier,
there were parts of the standard that were not being searched, nor
presenting themselves correctly to your crossreferencing software.
If you relied on such tactics to decide your yes or no vote, you
should review the standard again and base your vote on full
information.

Should I just retype this thing to get it into a flat ascii format?
I can do that in the course of a w

end; it's one of my mutant
powers.

Bear

Ray Blaak

2007-08-19, 7:13 pm

Ray Dillinger <bear@sonic.net> writes:
> Should I just retype this thing to get it into a flat ascii format?
> I can do that in the course of a w

end; it's one of my mutant
> powers.

Well, yes, if you are willing to do it. Where would it live?
--
Cheers, The Rhythm is around me,
The Rhythm has control.
Ray Blaak The Rhythm is inside me,
rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net The Rhythm has my soul.

Tom Lord

2007-08-19, 7:13 pm

On Aug 18, 5:59 pm, Ray Dillinger <b...@sonic.net> wrote:

> Should I just retype this thing to get it into a flat ascii format?
> I can do that in the course of a w

end; it's one of my mutant
> powers.
>

Demand a permissive copyright license, first.

Otherwise, you're better off spending three w

ends
and paraphrasing all of the essential details,
instead. We can re-use a lot of that 5.97 text when
writing a standard for Scheme, if they'll let us ;-)

-t

Sponsored Links