Re: a (revised) draft of R5RS

[Matthias Blume <blume@CS.Princeton.EDU>]

Maybe it has something to do with the Scheme crowd, but I still don't
understand why a not-so-silly consideration is being ridiculed in such
a way.  I won't even quote the things that are put into my mouth and
which I have never said.

See, I intensionally avoided saying that the GC (as we all know and
love it) should clean up after ports that are no longer needed.  I
only said that system resources other than memory should be managed in
an analogous way -- to maintain the illusion of unlimited supply.  I
never said that one has to wait until the system runs out of memory to
get file descriptors back.  How does one do that?  I don't exactly
know. Maybe there is a research topic in here somewhere.

Anyway, I don't buy the efficiency vs. semantics argument, because the
problems with semantics arise only with dynamic-wind or
unwind-protect, both of which I do not consider important, necessary,
or desirable.

Let me stop here before I get ridiculed further.

-Matthias