[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal
From: |
Oleg Kolosov |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Aug 2014 10:31:44 +0400 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 |
On 08/23/14 19:35, Peter Bex wrote:
> Hello hackers!
>
> I've made a start on the wiki, at what we'd like CHICKEN 5 to be about.
> Please, do not make this into another "pony page", only add things that
> we really need to look at which require a rework in core which may be
> backwards-incompatible.
>
> http://wiki.call-cc.org/chicken-5-roadmap
>
> I already fear I may have gone a bit overboard with adding too many
> things I'd really like to see myself :)
>
> I'd especially appreciate feedback on the core library names and
> the things to kill from core. I will be expanding this page over the
> next few days/weeks.
>
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
I have a few questions:
Is there a way to get rid of ##sys# prefix everywhere? It might be
matter of preference, but it makes the sources harder to read.
Regarding continuations I think that call/cc is an advanced feature
people brag about when advocating Scheme but not so useful in practise.
So a "better API" is just TL;DR for most. Isn't the new API makes life
easier for implementors too? And benefit greatly from direct support
from performance standpoint. Especially considering that
handle-exceptions form essentially combines capture and graft in an
ad-hoc manner. So maybe we could go other way and define call/cc in
terms of capture and return just as in Feeley paper and discourage it's
usage in favour of simpler API.
Mentioning exceptions, I find whole SRFI-12 quite useless - it's just
too clunky to use. And looking at newer proposals I find it
disappointing that Scheme community, given it's rich computer science
heritage, haven't produced anything better than condition properties. I
still want to research the topic a bit more, and studying other
implementations, maybe someone could help me with some links or examples
of interesting solutions of the problem?
Regarding egg versioning, let's make CHICKEN itself a dependency too,
with the default (if not declared) to <= 4. This way the egg authors can
clearly declare which releases they support.
--
Regards, Oleg
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, (continued)
Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, John Cowan, 2014/08/24
Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal,
Oleg Kolosov <=
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, Peter Bex, 2014/08/25
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, Oleg Kolosov, 2014/08/26
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, Peter Bex, 2014/08/26
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, John Cowan, 2014/08/26
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, Oleg Kolosov, 2014/08/26
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, Peter Bex, 2014/08/27
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, Oleg Kolosov, 2014/08/28
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, Peter Bex, 2014/08/28
Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, John Cowan, 2014/08/26
Re: [Chicken-hackers] Made a start with CHICKEN 5 proposal, John Cowan, 2014/08/25