[plt-scheme] Re: PLT R6RS questions and answers (renamed thread)

From: Ernie Smith (esmith at acanac.net)
Date: Mon Nov 24 23:47:56 EST 2008

hendrik at topoi.pooq.com wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 09:19:27AM -0600, Robby Findler wrote:
>> Folks,
>>   At the risk of repeating myself, core PLT members have put in a huge
>> amount of effort into R6RS already. I think it is time to stop telling
>> us how more would be better and instead step up and contribute.
> Indeed.  Although the R6RS-only fanatics seem to be arguing that less is 
> better.  Still, I expect de-facto portability could also be achieved by 
> porting PLT Scheme to more platforms.  I have no idea how many platforms 
> provide PLT Scheme at the moment, nor how difficult that is

Portability is a trait.

Dont think of it as merely the concern with getting program A to
work on Congiguration B, of getting the game you are working
on to run on a Mac and PC.

Think of it as a quality of a program, or a function,
that governs its re-usability.

If you blindly use whatever falls out of your next
search each time you accomplish something, before too long
you have created re-usability grid-lock.

So some people seek ways to keep baggage acquisition
within predictable and manageable limits.
That is not fanaticism, that is craftsmanship.

Posted on the users mailing list.