On Oct 30, 2008, at 3:12 AM, Michele Simionato wrote:
Indeed. Now I understand why Aziz ranted against the R6RS editors wasting their time on unneeded features and not focusing on the module system/portability issues :-/
First off, it's not called "unneeded features"; the correct technical term is "the bike shed". :-) Second, I don't think my rant was against the editors, who IMHO, for the most part, actually did a good job given the circumstances. It was mostly against those who were crying murder for "#; is useless", "NaN is not a number", or any comment involving square brackets. Revisiting some of the formal comments found in http://www.r6rs.org/formal-comments/ I'm actually quite happy with the final outcome (given the circumstances, again). Yes, it could've been better (name one thing which can't be made better, other than Nutella), or maybe it couldn't have. I think that the decision to ratify R6RS was/is a good thing and was the only way to move forward (as opposed to making small editorial changes like the difference between R4RS and R5RS). Should stop now. Aziz,,,
