[R6RS] my notes on today's conference call (28 March 2007)

[William D Clinger]

telephone conference March 28 2007 8:00am-10:00am
Will, Matthew, Mike, Anton, Kent present by 8:01am

0. finalize agenda (1 minute)

1. action items (1 minute)
   - draft responses for each ticket 135 and 137+ (All)
   - record response votes (All)
        ongoing
   - draft responses for ticket numbers 166, 196, 198, 202, 204, 205,
     208-222, 224, 226-229, 231-233
        not done
   - need final resolution in responses for ticket numbers 150, 164
        not done
   - update ticket-nnn responses to reflect decisions:
        done in only a few cases
     154: allow bytevectors to be self-evaluating (but not vectors or ())
     166: formal comment rejected
     225, 229, 223: strings are not immutable, string-set! in a separate
       library, string-ref preserved, string-ref returns character (aka
       Unicode scalar value), no variable-length strings (encourage SRFIs),
       allow direct creation of text ports (done in ticket 225 response?),
       report should say that string-ref and string-set! should be O(1),
       add string-for-each
     194: leave hash-table-immutable? but change "immutable" argument
       to hash-table-copy to a "mutable" argument
     196: formal comment rejected
     205: add cons*
     215: do not hyphenate bytevector, do not hyphenate hashtable
   - update r6rs to reflect additional decisions:
     - allow (case-lambda)
     - probably use "should" for programmer requirements that implementations
       are not required to enforce

3. revisit unspecified value and mrvs semantics? (10 minutes)
   - tickets 152, 156
   - see https://r6rs.scheming.org/node/588
     - adopt and select A, B, or C
     - or D: like C but restricted to 0 or 1 unspecified values
     - don't adopt
        straw polls:
            Mike's potential motion
                yes: Matthew, Mike
                no: Kent, Anton
                abstain: Will
            Will's potential motion
                yes: Will, Anton
                no: Kent, Matthew, Mike
            A, B, C/D:                
                B: Matthew, Mike
                C: Anton
                abstain: Will, Kent
        Mike moved we basically decide to maintain the R5RS
            position 1 or position 2 with constraints described
            as above, with option C; Anton seconded
            yes: Kent, Matthew, Mike, Anton
            abstain: Will
        Note: option C includes dropping "the" unspecified value

4. standard-x-port return fresh binary ports? (5 minutes)
   - ticket 183
        Mike moved (and Will seconded):
            add current-error-port to simple i/o
            copy the three current-x-port procedures to port i/o
            adopt formal comment 183
        motion passed unanimously

5. add buffer modes to open-file-input-port? (5 minutes)
   - ticket 186
        adopt formal comment
            yes: Will, Kent, Matthew, Anton
            no: Mike
   - do we allow peeking on unbuffered input port?
        yes
        if there are two ports connected to the same source,
        and reading from that source changes the source,
        then peeking on one port will make that character
        inaccessible via the other port

6. add make-parameter and parameterize? (5 minutes)
   - ticket 184
        Will moved we reject the formal comment and delegate
        the drafting of our response to someone other than
        Mike or Kent; Anton volunteered; no objections

7. allow/require hash-table-hash-function to return a procedure? (5 minutes)
   - ticket 189
        Mike moved we reject the formal comment; Kent seconded
            yes: Kent, Matthew, Mike
            no: Anton
            abstain: Will

8. allow compilers to reject programs with obvious violations? (10 minutes)
   - ticket 198
        current formal response accepts assert, rejects rest of comment
            yes: Will, Kent, Matthew, Mike, Anton

9. add file-length, specify set-file-position! extension behavior (5 minutes)
   - ticket 200
        Will moved we get rid of set-port-position! and the
        the associated predicate; Matthew seconded
            yes: Will
            no: Kent, Matthew, Mike, Anton
        Kent moved we adopt the Posix semantics for set-port-position!
        when the underlying object is a file; Anton seconded
            yes: Will, Kent, Matthew, Anton
            abstain: Mike
    tabled; we'll need to read Kent's draft response

10. specify freshness/mutability of quasiquoted structure? (5 minutes)
   - ticket 204
        BTW, quoted constants within the same phase should
            evaluate to the same value (according to eqv?) each
            time the quoted constant is evaluated; the project
            editor should add this to the report.
        The question for ticket 204 is whether it's okay to
            mutate quasiquoted structures.
    tabled until next week

We adjourned before getting around to the following agenda items:

11. eliminate library export immutability loophole? (5 minutes)
   - ticket 208

12. should <body> allow mixing definitions with expressions? (5 minutes)
   - ticket 212

13. should map return new list structure each time? (5 minutes)
   - ticket 220
   - option 1: entirely new list structure
   - option 2: not modify earlier return values

14. is nan not a real number? (5 minutes)
   - ticket 130
   - also question about flmin and flmax not being specified for nan

15. allow inline hex escapes anywhere?
   - ticket 231
   - or "allow anywhere except within a hex escape"?

x. Rename "lookahead" procedure-name prefix to "look-ahead"? (bottom of
   ticket 214)

16. adjourned around 10:01am

Will