> Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
>> This makes me wonder: If you can't specify the hooking-up code in the
>> SRFI, then how are implementors supposed to do any better? Either it
>> can be done, or it can't. If it can't be done, well, that's another
>> major issue.

xxxxxx@freenetproject.org wrote:
> The issue isn't whether its possible to connect a collection to some
> dispatch system, but whether its possible to define an interface as a
> frontend to any dispatch system.  Its the latter that may not be
> possible.

This is why experimentation and implementation experience are useful. It
lets you know whether an abstract design is really workable, or if it's
just another unimplementable abstract design.

Also, please beware of double standards. You tend to apply different
standards to your own ideas and criticisms than you do to ideas and
criticisms from other people. When I say, "It may not be implementable,"
or "This design goal is desirable," you challenge me to back up those
statements. However, when you say similar things, you typically assume
that everyone will agree and that further explanation or justification
is unnecessary. That's a natural tendency, but it's also an aggravating
tendency.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd