>>>>> "Thien-Thi" == Thien-Thi Nguyen <xxxxxx@glug.org> writes:

Thien-Thi> xxxxxx@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de (Michael Sperber [Mr.  Preprocessor]) writes:

Thien-Thi>    That's reasonable, but I, personally don't.

Thien-Thi> here's your chance to design a process that other people can use.

Thien-Thi>    - A unique naming scheme can serve its function

Thien-Thi> 	if

Thien-Thi>      it's formulated in the context of a fixed set of proposals,
Thien-Thi>      effectively forming a library collection.  Ideally, this collection
Thien-Thi>      would be comprehensive in some sense of the word.  Presently, in
Thien-Thi>      almost any sense of the word, the collection that would result from
Thien-Thi>      the current SRFI set is not comprehensive.

Thien-Thi> i isolated the bad word here.  "ideally" is also tempting, but "if" wins
Thien-Thi> by precedence.  it seems to me that predicating "usefulness" on vague
Thien-Thi> notions of hypothetical completeness means nothing can ever be deemed
Thien-Thi> useful.

You're right, of course.  I seem to remember writing the word "best"
before the "if", but it seems that never happened.  If you read the
rest of what I wrote, I never contested usefulness.  There's some
context you snipped.

--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla