Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!ariel.unm.edu!nmsu!opus!ted From: ted@nmsu.edu (Ted Dunning) Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme Subject: Re: Re^2: Scheme standard approved Message-ID: Date: 12 Dec 90 19:12:51 GMT References: <9012101321.aa19682@mc.lcs.mit.edu> <440@data.UUCP> Sender: news@NMSU.Edu Organization: NMSU Computer Science Lines: 41 In-reply-to: kend@data.UUCP's message of 11 Dec 90 22:49:40 GMT In article <440@data.UUCP> kend@data.UUCP (Ken Dickey) writes: [I know I am going to get flamed for this as I tend to piss people off in email. Apologies in advance. One of these years I will learn more self control...] hopefully, i will stay an insensitive clod. your posting didn't bother me a bit. what you said needed saying. I think that you should take another look at the people Chris has mentioned and the amount of effort they have invested. they have done an enormously good thing. On the positive side, some sw companies only allow the use of languages which have a formal standard from a recognized standards body. this is a good point. Needless to say, an agreement was reached that a standard was better than no standard and that the IEEE process gave the optimal result. The IEEE retains the copyright to the standard. This is one price of that particular process. i agree that a standard is a good thing (although my previous post didn't sound like that). i am curious, though, if having the standard approved means that only paper copies from the ieee are legal, and that ftp copies are no longer going to be available. _that_ would be a pity, and would, in my opinion, be a defect in the ieee policy. We certainly owe a debt to the people Chris mentioned as well as to Chris Haynes himself. let me second this. scheme is a bright spot in the bleak landscape of computer languages.