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.
>>>>> "Thien-Thi" == Thien-Thi Nguyen <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: Thien-Thi> email@example.com (Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor]) writes: Thien-Thi> That's reasonable, but I, personally don't. Thien-Thi> here's your chance to design a process that other people can use. Thien-Thi> - A unique naming scheme can serve its function Thien-Thi> if Thien-Thi> it's formulated in the context of a fixed set of proposals, Thien-Thi> effectively forming a library collection. Ideally, this collection Thien-Thi> would be comprehensive in some sense of the word. Presently, in Thien-Thi> almost any sense of the word, the collection that would result from Thien-Thi> the current SRFI set is not comprehensive. Thien-Thi> i isolated the bad word here. "ideally" is also tempting, but "if" wins Thien-Thi> by precedence. it seems to me that predicating "usefulness" on vague Thien-Thi> notions of hypothetical completeness means nothing can ever be deemed Thien-Thi> useful. You're right, of course. I seem to remember writing the word "best" before the "if", but it seems that never happened. If you read the rest of what I wrote, I never contested usefulness. There's some context you snipped. -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla