[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Broken naming convention
- To: srfi-97@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Broken naming convention
- From: "Phil Bewig" <pbewig@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 08:16:36 -0500
- Delivered-to: srfi-97@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=ifF9a50Ahvi/CADVW4tJ1pJZk2RKHQ7THLsDxO/zzDw=; b=acEeHFdhZdJyIzt+wRhkXTiO3xANVTkoFQ3oyMRNTLHDnpbiSo9coDHDzh4WB21q9J776mjWTeO5mUL6B1klASYEphPiGJ/dgNy3OECabrMbCWAU/xVZzpX3FOUa+lRr3bjALXPFN19LLCkHX6/u6GWuua3C0szCwY4L98ISwLY=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=kB55sJqEbE5MEtYIeWeEWKoTIM3m5GL/p/c0HdOSVS5fzVDe1ZvSmZRQqfFVKVaajszXyo2JY7H1GfcjERMOF1AbLkLrG6cer9EWIriOb2bWX4NM2AThf9UYH1HSczJJBuuR64G0NOk397IF//wfyak7U6hFnAwNk+nhKuB/BmU=
- In-reply-to: <E1JewSP-00044R-0F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <E1JewSP-00044R-0F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Some people think R6RS is an obvious mistake.
If there must be an R6RS, let's at least follow it.
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 1:04 PM, William D Clinger <will@xxxxxxxxxxx
David Van Horn wrote:
> On the other hand, nobody has made an argument for why
> strict conformance to R6RS is compelling.
Indeed, all of us who have actually implemented the R6RS,
and most of those who claim to intend to implement the
R6RS, have said we will not implement obvious mistakes
in the R6RS.
The R6RS prohibition of numerical components in library
names looks like an obvious mistake to me.
If the R6RS community insists upon pedantic conformance,
then we should adopt the suggestion made by Olin Shivers
(personal communication): use Roman numerals.