On Thursday, June 12, 2003, at 09:03 AM, Felix Winkelmann wrote:

> Hello!
>
> Is the SRFI process somewhat "stalled"? There are several
> draft SRFI's *way* over the draft period, and I wonder
> what is going to happen now.
>
> I find this disappointing. I think the SRFI authors should
> show a little bit more commitment.
>
> cheers,
> felix
> --
> P.S. Yes, I'm a very impatient person... ;-)
>

SRFI 39 seems to have some problems (e.g., the name 'parameter,' stuff
involving
the 'dynamic environment,' et cetera), but the discussion just petered
out and
needs to be revived.

I'm not sure what to think of SRFI 42, Eager Comprehensions.  I like
the idea,
but I don't know how it will fit in with a standard collection API (not
in
reference to SRFI 44, but see below).

I think SRFI 33 is almost ready to be finalized, but people are just
being lazy
or something about it.

I don't, however, think SRFI 32 should be finalized, or, in fact, any
of the
collection SRFIs -- sorting, streams, vectors, or general collections.
Instead
we need to find some far more general collection library (and ditch
SRFIs 1 and
13, too).  SRFI 44 comes somewhat near that, as does a SRFI in
development
('Scheme Template Library,' as posted on c.l.scheme a few weeks ago),
but SRFI
44 is definitely nowhere near completion (I haven't finished its
reference
implementation, and Scott hasn't done much, as far as I've seen,
towards writing
a new draft that's far more functional (so I'd have to toss any
reference
implementation I'd written so far, anyways)), and SRFI 45(?) would be
far more
generalized with a real module system in the style of SML.

I know a module system is going to be very controversial, but the
problem can't
be ignored any longer.