[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Update, near finalization

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 63 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 63 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

Aubrey Jaffer wrote:
 > My focus is to get multidimensional arrays incorporated into R6RS; and
SRFIs are allegedly the way to do that.  R6RS will not incorporate
both SRFI-25 and SRFI-63; so concerns about their interoperations is
at most secondary for a standards track SRFI.

Ok.  But don't expect expect at least my Scheme implementation to
put effort into implementing SRFI-63 - at least until we get a
preview of R6RS.

(I do find the lack of openness in the R6RS process rather
unsuitable, FWIW.)

 > Yes it was.  It was the SRFI-25 authors who decided to be
incompatible.  See

Hm.  Ironically, it was I who pointed out the incompatibility.
But nobody who was actually was using Bawden-arrays spoke up, it
appears.  And it wasn't just "SRFI-25 authors who decided to
be incompatible" - others supported that decision.  I was the
only one (? - I haven't check the entire discussion acrhive) to
argue for compatibility (as I do again), but using Bawden-arrays
myself I could hardly object too strongly.

However, in the current situation I myself have implemented SRFI-25
arrays, so I *am* in a position to object.

SLIB certainly had more users when SRFI-25 was released.

Irrelevant at this point.  What is the usage *today*?

SRFI-63 now be penalized for the SRFI-25 authors' rudeness?

So "rudeness" should be met with "rudeness" - not to mention
exacerbating incompatibility headaches for "innocent bystanders?"

The specification of any linear index mapping by means of a procedure
is a clever synthesis which I doubt predates the 1980s.

That may be the case.

I will reword
the paragraph to emphasize the arbitrary linear mapping aspect.

I doubt arbitrary linear mapping are original with Bawden - but
expressing them using a procedure might be.

I am unfamiliar with Q; please send a citation if you think it should
be cited.

Probably not appropriate.  I was just using it as an indication to
suggest that arbitrary linear mappings predates 1993.
	--Per Bothner
per@xxxxxxxxxxx   http://per.bothner.com/