On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Per Bothner wrote:

> Andre van Tonder wrote:
>> In conclusion, the procedural/reflection interface is economical,
>> clean and simple.  I suggest removing the syntactic libraries from the
>> SRFI.
>
> I disagree.  A declarative/syntactic interface is preferable:
> - I believe it is easier to implement more efficiently.
> - It is more compatible with (optional) static typing and type declarations.
> - It is easier to optimize.
> - I think it is easier to use and supports better style.
>
> I.e. a declarative interface is what we should encourage libary writers,
> students, and textbooks to use.  Hence it needs to be in R6RS.  A procedural
> interface is useful for a few relatively rare/advanced applications, and it
> might be useful to *define* the declarative interface, but is definitely not
> as important in normal use.

You are right (I just posted a message where I changed my mind).  Declarative
is definitely better.

I believe it would be best if the declarative interface were (much) simplified.
That there should only be one such layer, and that any "library" (non-primitive)
features are best left for future SRFIs.

Cheers
Andre