|
seeds
Alex Shinn
(08 Oct 2015 05:03 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(08 Oct 2015 07:55 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
Arthur A. Gleckler
(08 Oct 2015 17:46 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(08 Oct 2015 19:38 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
Arthur A. Gleckler
(08 Oct 2015 21:47 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(09 Oct 2015 08:09 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
Kevin Wortman
(09 Oct 2015 17:18 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(09 Oct 2015 18:33 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
Kevin Wortman
(13 Oct 2015 17:36 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(13 Oct 2015 18:28 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
Alex Shinn
(14 Oct 2015 01:59 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(14 Oct 2015 09:17 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(14 Oct 2015 10:06 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
Alex Shinn
(16 Oct 2015 01:23 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(16 Oct 2015 13:34 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
Alex Shinn
(16 Oct 2015 23:48 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(17 Oct 2015 12:08 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
Alex Shinn
(17 Oct 2015 13:12 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(17 Oct 2015 14:09 UTC)
|
|
What SRFIs are for
John Cowan
(17 Oct 2015 14:41 UTC)
|
|
Re: What SRFIs are for
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(17 Oct 2015 15:56 UTC)
|
|
Re: What SRFIs are for
John Cowan
(17 Oct 2015 16:55 UTC)
|
|
Re: What SRFIs are for
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(17 Oct 2015 18:08 UTC)
|
|
Re: What SRFIs are for
John Cowan
(17 Oct 2015 18:51 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
John Cowan
(15 Oct 2015 17:49 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
Alex Shinn
(09 Oct 2015 02:54 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(09 Oct 2015 07:59 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds John Cowan (15 Oct 2015 17:51 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(15 Oct 2015 23:08 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
John Cowan
(16 Oct 2015 13:09 UTC)
|
|
Re: seeds
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(16 Oct 2015 14:01 UTC)
|
Re: seeds John Cowan 15 Oct 2015 17:51 UTC
Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer scripsit:
> I want to prioritize the normal use-cases and the currently existing
> Scheme implementations. If we can support relatively obscure use-cases
> as well, without disrupting normal use-cases, and without disrupting
> compatibility with existing implementations, that's a nice bonus.
Scheme is unique in that it has always accepted custom hash functions.
CL does not, Python does not, Perl does not, JS does not. I think this
is not only an important feature to preserve, but it is important to
allow existing custom hash functions to continue to work, if not most
securely.
--
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan xxxxxx@ccil.org
"You need a change: try Canada" "You need a change: try China"
--fortune cookies opened by a couple that I know