From: "Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen" <marc.nieper@gmail.com>
To: guile-devel@gnu.org
Cc: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add SRFI: srfi-121; generators
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 14:48:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEYrNrS6S5TKkGJ-PSi-6D7sY-NDtt3jmhCf_B7wGKRcjuy=Qw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEYrNrTv48FajG2HPwCPBsBTwg5p36Y1CEwhZbm3CbA5Vp5PYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Am Mo., 3. Aug. 2020 um 21:41 Uhr schrieb Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
<marc.nieper@gmail.com>:
> > I'm sorry to say it, but in my opinion SRFI-121 and SRFI-158 should be
> > deprecated and avoided. The reference implementations do not match the
> > specifications, and the specifications themselves are self-contradictory
> > (see above). Therefore, it's entirely possible that users of these
> > SRFIs may have contradictory expectations about how these procedures
> > behave. Some may have read the spec one way, some may have read the
> > spec in a contradictory way, some may have learned from how the buggy
> > reference implementation behaves, and others may have learned from the
> > behavior of a different SRFI-121 implementation that doesn't have those
> > bugs. At this point, I don't see how the problems can be fixed without
> > breaking some users' assumptions, and therefore breaking existing code.
> Of course, all this can be fixed, but by the sheer size of R7RS-large,
> I doubt that it ever will.
PPS That said, the more people are committing a bit of their spare
time to R7RS-large, the better the result will be. So if you are
inclined to improve SRFI 121/158 in the areas in which you have
perceived deficiencies, I am sure that John will put an improved
version on the next ballot.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-04 12:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <mailman.61.1596470427.10776.guile-devel@gnu.org>
2020-08-03 19:41 ` [PATCH] add SRFI: srfi-121; generators Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
2020-08-04 12:48 ` Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen [this message]
2020-08-04 15:24 ` John Cowan
2020-08-04 15:58 ` Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
2020-08-04 17:24 ` Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
2021-01-21 18:39 John Cowan
2021-01-23 0:58 ` Mark H Weaver
2021-01-23 2:14 ` Shiro Kawai
2021-01-23 2:18 ` Arthur A. Gleckler
2021-01-23 6:37 ` Mark H Weaver
2021-01-26 3:29 ` John Cowan
2021-01-26 6:48 ` Linus Björnstam
2021-01-26 6:49 ` Linus Björnstam
2021-01-26 7:14 ` Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
2021-01-26 11:54 ` Linus Björnstam
2021-04-08 15:53 ` Arthur A. Gleckler
2021-04-11 6:52 ` Linus Björnstam
2021-04-11 16:17 ` Arthur A. Gleckler
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-08-01 3:42 John Cowan
2020-08-02 22:39 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-07-01 0:09 nly
2019-07-01 5:06 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-07-01 6:00 ` Mark H Weaver
2019-07-01 6:21 ` Amar Singh
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
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAEYrNrS6S5TKkGJ-PSi-6D7sY-NDtt3jmhCf_B7wGKRcjuy=Qw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=marc.nieper@gmail.com \
--cc=cowan@ccil.org \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=mhw@netris.org \
/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).