On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 1:27 PM Frank Ruben <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:

OK, this took some time, but I now finished to read through the complete discussion and to take some notes while doing so. You can find the attempt of a summary in this gist - I hope that the content won't hurt anyone's feelings and that it doesn't have gross omissions.

I'm grateful that you were willing to wade through all that discussion, and I'm happy that it was comprehensible!  Thanks very much for writing a summary so that the next person won't have to read so much to catch up.  I'm wondering where we should put it.  Lassi, you seem to be an expert at setting up wikis for such documents.  Would you like to suggest a place for Frank's summary?

Incidentally, during the R7RS-small effort, having wiki pages to summarize issues we were working through was a huge help in keeping the discussion on track and moving forward.  The Trac instance we used was shut down recently, so I put together a static archive of it so we wouldn't lose all of our notes.  I wrote a blog post about that here:

  https://speechcode.com/blog/rnrs-gardening

And while writing that: my sincere respect to the work done here, and not only to the technical work but also to that most civil discussion - starting from opposing ends in places and working to a common approach with no friction, that's impressive.

You are very kind, and thank you for pointing that out, too.  Let's show the world that civil discussion really can happen on the internet.

In case the notes might be useful, please reply with corrections and/or a proposal where to best post them; if not, no harm done - writing them down already helped me.

Two more questions:

a) If I didn't miss it, the option to use Racket's types or contracts has not been mentioned when discussing the potential formats of type signatures. Not only are both syntaxes field tested, but even if Racket is no longer Racket Scheme, it should still be possible to "steal" some of Racket's definitions for the purpose discussed here.

That's a good idea.  I've added that to my notes here:

  https://github.com/schemeweb/wiki/wiki/Shuttle-Spiffy-ideas 

b) Any concrete item where I can support now? Time is limited as for anyone, but for any concrete task I can at least check whether I would be able to help. Otherwise I'll go through the repo and check for options based on the current status.

We're in a holding pattern right now, but if you'd like to experiment with proposed markup for method signatures or hooking into an editor's auto-completion system or something like that, please do.  I'd love to see lots of experiments so that we have experience with all the great things that extracting this data might do for us.