Re: scsh 0.6.7 is *broken*, 0.7 of very uncertain value Arthur A. Gleckler 11 Jul 2019 21:16 UTC
John Cowan <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: | The question is whether the existence of scsh | 0.7 (which is in working order) plus the list of | differences in the Implementation section of | SRFI 170, minimally satisfies the need for a | SRFI 170 sample implementation. (The reference | to scsh 0.6.7 in that section is incorrect.) If | not, the best we can do is to write an | implementation for one specific Scheme, either | scsh or another one. The very idea behind this SRFI, which is a good one, almost inevitably leads to its implementation being non-portable. There is an escape clause in the SRFI process document for such cases. See the sublist in item #7 under Structure: https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-process.html#Structure Having an implementation like that of SCSH 0.7, which is relatively close to what the SRFI specifies, will help implementers a lot. Anything you can do to provide sample implementations of the differences, too, would be greatly appreciated by future implementers, I'm sure. My feeling is that as long as SRFI 170 doesn't differ too much from SCSH 0.7, a list of differences is sufficient. But it would be much better if some implementation, somewhere, actually matched SRFI 170 in detail so that it could be properly vetted by at least one implementer before the SRFI is finalized. Is there any Scheme implementer reading this who would be willing to implement SRFI 170 in their Scheme?