Derick Eddington <xxxxxx@gmail.com> writes:

> Thank you for the feedback.
>
> On Fri, 2009-12-25 at 20:11 +0100, Göran Weinholt wrote:
>> Derick Eddington <xxxxxx@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > The new revision of SRFI 103 changes the file name extension for R6RS
>> > library files from .sls and .IMPL.sls to .r6rs-lib and .IMPL-r6rs-lib..
>>
>> Why did you make this change,
>
> To support multiple Scheme dialects; and to support system-specific
> files via a more useful general facility instead of a limited odd one;
> and to not encode the #\. character; and to have the R6RS extension name
> fit its purpose.

I was under the impression that SRFI-103 would standardize an already
widely implemented feature and specify all the little details that
currently differ between implementations. But perhaps a different
document will be necessary to accomplish that.

I was going to reply to all your other points (nested file extensions?),
but I removed that portion of this email, because it was very tiresome.
There's nothing wrong with .sls. It's not vague, it's precise. Nobody
else uses it (I couldn't find it on filext.com and file-extensions.org),
so it seems to be unique. I just don't think you will convince many
people to use .r6rs-lib. You will certainly not convince me to change
until the implementations I use remove support for the old, and IMO
better, file extension. If someone else wants to use .sls in a
conflicting manner, then that should be their problem, not ours.

Regards,

--
Göran Weinholt <xxxxxx@weinholt.se>
"The clumsy notational conventions adhered to in many mathematical publications
leave room for only one conclusion: mathematicians are not even taught how to
select a suitable notation from the established ones, let alone that they are
taught how to design a new one when needed." -- E.W. Dijkstra, EDW709