[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Can we standardize Scheme without killing it?
I haven't entered the fray yet, and I don't want to do anything about
heating up the debate. My personal opinion is that I would prefer not
to standardize, but I suspect that we will have to do so for a large
variety of reasons.
I prefer the IEEE option as I understand it now over the ANSI option,
but I am afraid that costs *ARE* the single determining feature in my
ability to work on this. They are one reason I prefer IEEE. I'd hate
to get left out, but I am a new faculty member (first year) and have
no way to afford travel expenses. Thus, the MITRE meeting has
significant appeal to me; but that's very selfish.
One final note: I'm scared by Don Oxley's message regarding a
diversion from the minimalist standard. I'm not very much of a
minimalist myself, but I see absolutely no hope of getting a standard
we will all like if we don't strongly adopt a Steele-like stance
against new features. I suggest that we take a fairly strong line
that any proposed extension which can be implemented using Yellow
Pages style be kept out of the standard entirely. I also believe that
we *have* to finally agree on macros to make this philosophy reaonably