On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:12:14 -0400, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote:

> Although some of the libraries were pushed through the SRFI process,
> they were not properly marinated by being implemented and used heavily to
> flush out design and usability bugs.  Only on very rare occasions should
> something be standardized that has not been in widespread use already.

Indeed, I agree that the R6RS effort did not properly adhere to
standardization principles of testing and implementing (and using in real
life) before they standardized things. On the other hand, I wouldn't
consider that necessarily ad hoc, since many of there work did have
reasons and direction, just it didn't have the proper testing for it.

And, I know that people won't like it when I say this, but I find R6RS to
be quite usable in practice.

	Aaron W. Hsu

--
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. -- C. S. Lewis

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports