Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!crdgw1!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!percy!data!kend
From: kend@data.UUCP (Ken Dickey)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Subject: Re: An open appeal to the Scheme standards committee
Message-ID: <499@data.UUCP>
Date: 29 May 91 16:15:40 GMT
References: <5204@autodesk.COM>
Organization: Microcosm, Beaverton, OR
Lines: 37
Bcc: kend

robertj@autodesk.com (Young Rob Jellinghaus) writes:

>In fact, we have made substantial investments incorporating Scheme,
>even though the standard is still developing, ...

>Recently, however, we have become worried about an apparent trend in
>the standardization process.  Although we do not have full information
>about the progress of the standard, we are under the impression that
>large, complex or portentious language extensions are being proposed
>and considered.  If adopted into the standard, they may significantly
>burden Scheme implementations.  At the least some are very difficult
>to analyze with confidence.  (Eg multiple return values, macro
>facilities).

There is an "Standard for the Scheme Programming Language" which is
available from the IEEE (I believe the phone # is 201-562-3800).  This
is the result of an IEEE standards group which is now dissolved.  It
was dissolved when the standard was accepted.

There is also a Scheme Authors' Group which has been responsible for
the R^NRS (the Revised Reports).  The next report--R4RS--is very close
to the IEEE standard but with the addition of macros.

The IEEE standard is very conservative.  The R^NRS reports are
considered "experimental", but are in fact very conservative.
Historically, no language feature has gotten into R^NRS except by
complete concensus by the Scheme community--a feat difficult to
achieve.  In fact no language feature I am aware of has been proposed
by the authors' group without experimental implementation(s) and usage
being done first.

While language features are continually being proposed and discussed,
this in fact has very little chance of a near-term impact on any
Scheme standard.  So, don't worry.  


-Ken Dickey				kend@data.uucp