Re: SRFI-22 -- scripts.

[Neil Jerram]

>>>>> "thi" == Thien-Thi Nguyen <address@hidden> writes:

    thi>    From: Neil Jerram <address@hidden>
    thi>    Date: 08 Feb 2002 11:06:58 +0000

    thi>    Surely the purists would argue that it doesn't matter which one of
    thi>    them you get -- isn't that, like, the whole point?

    thi> well the purists must neither value separation of
    thi> architecture and implementation,

Sorry?  Surely it's precisely _because_ they value this separation
that they think a standard access point is a good idea.

    thi> nor comparitive analysis, then.

Agreed.  But sometimes the user just wants to get a job done, and
isn't worried about comparative aspects such as performance.  (Plus,
at least theoretically, interface should specify _all_ observables
anyway, including `comparative' aspects such as performance.)

    thi> a real purist would explicitly specify a shell script with
    thi> overridable environment dependencies.  if you're going to
    thi> have a monarchy, let the king be a puppet rather than a
    thi> self-serving duke.

I'm not sure I get the analogy, but I agree that such a script would
be better.  I think a script (or set of scripts) like this would best
be a separately managed project that saw it as its business to keep
abreast of how to invoke standard behaviour in all its supported
implementations.

    thi> i wouldn't mind not thinking about srfi-22 for now -- maybe
    thi> there will be a better approach in the future.

Fair enough.  (And, anyway, I should probably go and read it before
making any further statements...)

        Neil