From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tom Lord Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: #f/() tedium Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 00:25:19 -0700 (PDT) Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200209050725.AAA20302@morrowfield.regexps.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1031209893 18534 127.0.0.1 (5 Sep 2002 07:11:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 07:11:33 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17mqnc-0004oo-00 for ; Thu, 05 Sep 2002 09:11:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17mqp8-0000LW-00; Thu, 05 Sep 2002 03:13:06 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17mqox-0000LD-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Sep 2002 03:12:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17mqov-0000Kq-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Sep 2002 03:12:54 -0400 Original-Received: from 1cust164.tnt13.sfo8.da.uu.net ([63.10.241.164] helo=morrowfield.regexps.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17mqou-0000Km-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Sep 2002 03:12:53 -0400 Original-Received: (from lord@localhost) by morrowfield.regexps.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA20302; Thu, 5 Sep 2002 00:25:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lord@morrowfield.regexps.com) Original-To: guile-devel@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1302 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1302 It bugs me when people site R5RS as a reason to do _anything_ to their scheme impl., and this is a timely time to mention it. As recent threads on comp.lang.scheme illustrate, a lot of what's interesting about Scheme is that it is a (conceptual) _vector_ (not a significant _point_) in language design space. RnRS is interesting (in my opinion) because it demonstrates what can be accomplished with a combination of minimalism, "lispism", and care for the underlying math. Some aspects of RnRS, such as the I/O procedures, are clearly so academic as to be nearly worthless in practice. In that light, examine the #f/() distinction. If you look at scheme as a language in want of a CPAN (as one c.l.s. poster put it) -- I think you'll make compromises that are ....well..., in the words of Wavy Gravy -- "not specifically good". But it's your trip. Against this, I suppose, are the SRFIs. I haven't surveyed them to see how heavily they rely on #f != (). I did find that Olin's list library was an easy port. It used to be (still is?) a design principle of slib to be agnostic on the issue. And, as tb and I seem to have agreed to disagree off list (hope I'm not misrepresenting you too badly, tb), there are no clear pithy arguments or empirical evidence one way or the other. My current best "argument" is something like: try writing really tight Emacs lisp code for a while, with this issue in mind. That's probably simpler than trying to find some space aliens to ask. the gods must be crazy, and guile is a monkey with a coke bottle up a tree... -t _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel