Re: the discussion so far

["John.Cowan" <jcowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thomas Bushnell BSG scripsit:

> I want generically-named procedures to do the correct generic thing on
> the local system.  I want no generically-named procedures mandated by
> the standard when they cannot be implemented correctly on a
> fancy/schmancy system.

There is no "correct generic thing".

> Now if you want, as a system implementor, to continue to implement
> them, go right ahead.  But *please* don't force every Scheme system,
> include a fancy/schmancy one, to do so!  

Fancy systems are precisely the ones that need both "small, fast, and simple"
and "large, slow, and complex".  (These are relative terms.)

-- 
You let them out again, Old Man Willow!                 John Cowan
What you be a-thinking of?  You should not be waking!   jcowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Eat earth!  Dig deep!  Drink water!  Go to sleep!       www.reutershealth.com
Bombadil is talking.                                    www.ccil.org/~cowan