Re: Initial comments William D Clinger 11 Aug 2008 23:09 UTC
Re: Initial comments Alan Watson 12 Aug 2008 04:27 UTC

Re: Initial comments Alan Watson 12 Aug 2008 04:27 UTC

Thanks for your reply, Will.

> Systematic use of
> the "rtd-" prefix in SRFI 99 prevents clashes with the
> names defined by the corresponding layers of the R6RS,

This is not C. We have a module system that allows arbitrary renaming
and prefixing. Or maybe this is C, and you intend this SRFI to be used
in module-less R5RS systems. Ugh. Please wait while I find a peg for
my nose.

> and reduces confusion between SRFI 99 procedures and
> those of the R6RS:  If a procedure's name begins with
> "rtd-", then it is part of the SRFI 99 API, not the
> R6RS.

There are two potential sources of confusion: having things that do
the same thing but have slightly different names and having things
that do slightly different things but have the same name. I worry more
about the former and you about the latter. We went through this same
argument with the R6RS fixnum and flonum libraries.

Can you at least rename "rtd-all-field-names" to "rtd-field-names"?

> No, the behavior specified by the R6RS is not quite
> equivalent to the behavior specified by SRFI 99

Thanks for the explanation of the R6RS oddness.

Regards,

Alan
--
Alan Watson
http://www.alan-watson.org/