[plt-scheme] SRFI-1 move to scheme/list?

From: Matthew Flatt (mflatt at cs.utah.edu)
Date: Mon Jan 28 11:26:50 EST 2008

At Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:12:07 -0600, "Corey Sweeney" wrote:
> Ok, i'm a little late getting in on this, but if I understand the
> discussion right, I think people are promoting the non-standard
> list.ss over the standardized SRFI-1, and the standardized R6RS list
> library.

I think the motivation is not so much to promote `scheme/list', but
given that `scheme/list' is re-exported by the PLT-specific and
PLT-default `scheme' language, to have more of the SRFI-1 functions
present by default --- when using PLT's `scheme', as opposed to a
portable language.

> I would like to remind that many of us who write code will
> prefer a standardized library when developing, so that when things go
> wrong and we need to port to a differnt scheme, that you don't have to
> spend time trying to write  a "list.ss->srfi-1 shim".  Wether it's
> srfi-1 or a R6RS lib dosn't matter, but just that it's some kind of
> standard that we'll be able to find implemented other places.

Right. I think people who want to write portable code are going to
start with R6RS, pull in some SRFIs, etc. The content of non-portable
libraries like `scheme' or `scheme/list' shouldn't matter in that case.

(FWIW, I expect to start on R6RS support in a couple of weeks, though
 development doesn't always go as expected.)


Posted on the users mailing list.