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

Re: SRFI naming

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

> al> As has been discussed on comp.lang.scheme, the naming scheme for SRFIs
> al> has become unwieldy: keeping thirty different numbers straight is
> al> beyond the mental capacity of those of us who inhaled questionable
> al> substances in college, and using the full titles is both too verbose
> al> and unamenable to embedding in an identifier.
> Could anyone remind me exactly what problem needs solving here?  I'm
> not sure I understand.

I, for example, wouldn't like code like this:

  [(and srfi-1 srfi-66 srfi-92 srfi-102) ...do this...]
  [(or srfi-2 srfi-16 srfi-42) ...do that...]

In the (likely) event that many Scheme systems support a large
number of SRFIs in the future, semi-portable code might very well look like
It also makes talking about SRFIs a little bit easier.