[R6RS] Re: R6RS = Common Scheme?
Mon Jan 26 08:18:52 EST 2004
> >>>>> "Marc" == Marc Feeley <feeley at IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes:
> Marc> [...]
> Marc> Note that after the implementations change, then these features are in
> Marc> the intersection! In a sense, what I am saying is that with some
> Marc> relatively small amount of discussion we can make the major
> Marc> implementations of Scheme agree on the syntax and semantics of
> Marc> operations they currently have with possibly slightly different syntax
> Marc> and semantics (lexical syntax extensions, filesystem operations, etc)
> Marc> or that are sufficiently simple and uncontroversial that they can
> Marc> easily be added to implementations where these features don't exist.
> I guess I'm thoroughly confused. Would a better word for "common" be
> "uncontroversial," then? How did you arrive at your list?
The term "Common Scheme" was meant tongue-in-cheek. Let's not start a
debate about what it means. Our time can be spent more productively
if we first elaborate a list of concrete issues to discuss.
More information about the R6RS