Re: SRFI-47 -- types and declarations. Taylor Campbell 25 Nov 2003 21:49 UTC
On Thursday, Nov 20, 2003, at 18:56 US/Eastern, Aubrey Jaffer wrote: > The SLIB array module introduces *no* syntax (and is completely > portable). I had included the read syntax in SRFI-47 because SRFI-4 > did! And it makes sense to introduce reader syntax! But not the way SRFI 4 does it, as has been shown in its discussion archive and by the existence of SRFI 10. > If one can't model on extant SRFIs, then the SRFI process has failed. > How was I supposed to discover that there are good SRFIs and bad > SRFIs? The SRFI-4 "Post-Finalization Discussion Archive" is empty of > content. ...try the 'Pre-Finalization Discussion Archive,' and nearly all of the messages there. > I will remove the read syntax from SRFI-47, which removes many of the > objections. Why not provide SRFI 10 reader constructors? This kind of thing is _exactly_ what SRFI 10 is for! Also, I don't think my other questions, those not regarding reader syntax, were addressed: will there be a follow-up complete array library to deprecate SRFI 43 and some of SRFI 13? and ARRAY=? is less general than it could be: why isn't it more like SRFI 1's LIST= or SRFI 43's VECTOR= ? I have also come up with another question: why is there no ARRAY, analogous to VECTOR as MAKE-ARRAY is analogous to MAKE-VECTOR?