1. 3

Here are the guiding principles and reasons for rejecting R6RS. This discussion gives historical color too.

  1.  

    1. 5

      Would someone please explain “Stygian Blue/Reddish Green” with respect to Scheme? Pretty sure we’re not talking about Pokémon games.

      1. 4

        I’m interested in the R7RS-large process but I think this vaguely qualifies as a violation of the rule against linking into projects’ issue-spaces, since the standardization ballots are intended for Scheme implementers and the format of the survey is hostile to casual reading. Is there an alternate link to the ballot text?

        1. 2

          Interesting, I hadn’t considered this. I know more than a few members have made r5rs compliant systems (largely unmaintained) but mostly believe the process is open to all schemers (even those without an srfi) and weighs implementations vs. users in various ways. Now, I don’t really understand the process (is this the 2nd working group of a 3rd one not listed anywhere?)

          intended for Scheme implementers

          Could you show where this is said, to help me understand the process better etc.?

          ballot text

          Closest I’ve found: https://codeberg.org/scheme/r7rs/src/branch/main/FOUNDATIONS.txt

          1. 3

            This is my bad, they’re definitely soliciting votes from scheme users also. Still though, you can’t read what’s being voted on behind this link without “registering to vote” and I think that makes this not a good main link for Lobsters.