Re: SRFI 123: 60 days taylanbayirli@xxxxxx (14 Oct 2015 17:56 UTC)
Re: SRFI 123: 60 days taylanbayirli@xxxxxx 14 Oct 2015 17:56 UTC
"Arthur A. Gleckler" <email@example.com> writes:
> This is just a reminder that SRFI 123 has now reached 60 days of
> discussion, which the SRFI process document says is the normal draft
> period. The 60- and 90-day periods described in that document haven't
> been enforced for a while, but I'd like to encourage authors and
> reviewers to keep them in mind so that discussion comes to a close and
> we can make progress on each document.
As it stands, the SRFI contains shameless favoritism of R6RS hashtables
over other hash table APIs.
I don't think we need to wait for R7RS-large deciding on a hash table
API though (which will probably take a long time), because it's fairly
clear that whatever hash table type is supported, it should be
considered a "sparse type" per SRFI-123, thus the same semantics
applying to R6RS hashtables should apply to that type.
So I think it's fine to finalize the current state.
One last thing though: the HTML document has an empty title currently.
There's a commit on top draft 9 on my repo that fixes this; can we
include that without making a new draft? There's no changes to the body
of the document or to any code.