This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 97 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 97 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
"Geoffrey Teale" <tealeg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I have one simple question. If you step back from this process, and you > think about someone coming to scheme for the first time, what value is there > in naming a library after the order that someone thought of the idea? > Please take the following in the good humour it is intended - I don't want > to start a flame war, just make a point. Essentially for the same reason that RFCs are numbered: So that the names for libraries can be chosen simply and without conflict. Remember that SRFIs are primarily documents, not libraries. They are also not a comprehensive set of libraries, but a community process. David's proposing a naming scheme that includes a mnemonic description of what the library is about: that seems like a step in the right direction. However, if you think think there's a way that allows choosing library names that are: - robust (i.e. don't need to be changed after they're picked) - unique over time - more intuitive than the SRFI numbers ... then I urge you to write it down and submit it. Me personally, I'd rather have dumb numbers where I know they're dumb, rather than more intuitive names chosen creatively to be unique. (Which is the one I want? PerlIO::gzip or Tie::Gzip, java.nio or java.io?) If you want to take this further, you should probably follow up on srfi-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla