This site is a static rendering of the Trac instance that was used by R7RS-WG1 for its work on R7RS-small (PDF), which was ratified in 2013. For more information, see Home.

Ticket 40: SRFI vs. R6RS precedence

arcfide@sacrideo.us
2010-10-18 02:26:04
WG1 - Core
alexshinn
major
arcfide
fixed
source
closed
2010-03-02 12:26:27
task

Given equal technical merit and compatible extensibility for WG2, should WG1 prefer SRFIs or standardized behaviors from R6RS when faced with the choice. For example, a version of syntax-violation vs. syntax-error.

I believe that we should in general favor the SRFIs. There are relatively few R6RS implementations (about six, depending on how you count), whereas there are many implementations of SRFIs (the median SRFI is implemented in seven Schemes). Certainly I'd prefer to standardize a highly popular SRFI such as SRFI 9 (25 Schemes) or SRFI 6 (24 Schemes) to the incompatible R6RS versions of syntactic records and string ports.

milestone
resolutionfixed
statusnewclosed

The WG voted to prefer SRFIs.