[plt-scheme] Are new Schemers supposed to be reading SRFIs?

From: Majorinc, Kazimir (kazimir at chem.pmf.hr)
Date: Fri May 11 05:11:49 EDT 2007

Eli Barzilay wrote:
> On May 10, Chongkai Zhu wrote:
>>> I think one complaint is that it is hard to decide who gets the "good"
>>> names, like "format.ss".
>> For current SRFIs in PLT Scheme, there is no name conflict at all.
>> For future SRFIs that may cause a name conflict, name+number is
>> always a solution.
> Yes, but consider a different future: the new "srfi-300" list library
> comes out, *then* people start talking about the need for common names
> and obviously they want to choose "list-old" for srfi-1 and "list" for
> sefi-300.  At this point you're stuck.
I think in long terms, "Shivers-99" or maybe "Shivers-99-lists" is the 
right choice.

Posted on the users mailing list.