This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 103 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 103 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 13:11 -0500, Aaron W. Hsu wrote: > On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 20:57:04 -0500, Derick Eddington > > I'm not sure what to do... > > Just get rid of the special character encoding behavior. Generally > speaking, I don't like the idea of tying things like this to an operating > system, and you're basically doing this. That's certainly what's being done. That's the purpose of SRFI 103. It's a real issue, currently causing problems, which needs to be addressed. If the SRFI was not tied to specific OSs, it would not be appropriate to assume anything about what a file name is or if there's even a file system. Scheme systems are free to do something else on OSs other than Windoze and unixes, and SRFI 103 should be trashed when Windoze is finally dead. The only aspect which is affected is library-file locating, all other aspects of using a Scheme system are orthogonal, so changing to some other standard for locating libraries will be cleanly doable. > There's not a good way to do > this, I think. It would be better to just let people deal with it on their > systems Requiring people to continually deal with such portability hassles is not going to help attract more people. (But it might help increase rage against Windoze, which I'm okay with.) > by either restricting the names Restricting library names because of Windoze's flaws is not acceptable. I'm definitely not going to do it myself. See my recent message at the SRFI 103 mailing list for more. > or loading the files manually. > There's nothing wrong with loading libraries explicitly, rather than > having them implicitly loaded when imported. I disagree and cannot support that. That's imperative style and not compatible with Scheme systems which don't have some outside context from which to execute the loading. R6RS libraries are supposed to be usable as the fundamental source-code unit, which necessitates auto-loading of imports. I think being compatible with systems which have an outside context (e.g. a traditional top-level) is good, but SRFI 103 must not discourage the use of all possible library names (because I'm not going to support corrupting symbols' usefulness) in systems which do not have that. -- : Derick ----------------------------------------------------------------