[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Just provide procedural interface
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Per Bothner wrote:
Andre van Tonder wrote:
In conclusion, the procedural/reflection interface is economical,
clean and simple. I suggest removing the syntactic libraries from the
I disagree. A declarative/syntactic interface is preferable:
- I believe it is easier to implement more efficiently.
- It is more compatible with (optional) static typing and type declarations.
- It is easier to optimize.
- I think it is easier to use and supports better style.
I.e. a declarative interface is what we should encourage libary writers,
students, and textbooks to use. Hence it needs to be in R6RS. A procedural
interface is useful for a few relatively rare/advanced applications, and it
might be useful to *define* the declarative interface, but is definitely not
as important in normal use.
You are right (I just posted a message where I changed my mind). Declarative
is definitely better.
I believe it would be best if the declarative interface were (much) simplified.
That there should only be one such layer, and that any "library" (non-primitive)
features are best left for future SRFIs.