[racket] Getting started with R6RS

On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 10:15:06PM -0400, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Neil Van Dyke wrote at 05/14/2011 07:16 PM:
>> Just to be clear, when I wish for R6RS to be shot in the gut and left  
>> to die painfully in a ditch, I mean that in the utmost nice and  
>> respectful way. :)  R5RS was getting close to a gem (with a few warts  
>> and glaring omissions), and R6RS is this big thing that PLT ultimately  
>> did not embrace.  With the effect that people have tended to start  
>> trying to do R6RS with PLT tools, but then wonder why there are rough  
>> edges and the PLT documentation is mostly full of these other things  
>> that don't seem to work in their R6RS program.
>
> To be further clear, I was not speaking there of the innate merits of  
> R6RS, but of the situation of the official standard and the most popular  
> implementation diverging.
>
> As someone who once went to pains to code portable libraries in a subset  
> of R4RS, I eventually decided that Racket was the de facto standard to  
> follow for now.  I can always move my personal work back to RnRS or to a  
> different dialect, without too much pain, if I want to.  For now, my  
> only pain comes from seeing prospective Racketeers get turned off Racket  
> and Scheme because they start off assuming they should use R6RS with  
> Racket tools and then get confused.  That's why all the displaced  
> aggression with the gut-shots.

And why Elliott Cable's proposed documentation paths may hit tie 
spot.

-- hendrik