This site is a static rendering of the Trac instance that was used by R7RS-WG1 for its work on R7RS-small (PDF), which was ratified in 2013. For more information, see Home.

Source for ticket #518

cc


    
changetime

    
2013-07-07 03:20:44

    
component

    
WG1 - Core

    
description

    
Aaron Hsu writes:

  We have, for some inexplicable reason, chosen to follow the wording and style of R5RS rather than the better, more precise, and clearer stylistic approach of the R6RS standard. I do not understand this except that it serves as a sort of reactionary statement against R6RS, which is not good. R6RS did a lot simply in standard organization and layout that we should have maintained, as well as with language, which we did not maintain. While we have incorporated a good deal of wording from R6RS, it would have been better to have started with R6RS as a base, rather than cherry picking from it.

    
id

    
518

    
keywords

    

    
milestone

    

    
owner

    
alexshinn

    
priority

    
major

    
reporter

    
cowan

    
resolution

    
wontfix

    
severity

    

    
status

    
closed

    
summary

    
The R7RS-small text should have been founded on the R6RS text

    
time

    
2013-05-13 09:12:00

    
type

    
defect

    
Changes

    
Change at time 2013-07-07 03:20:44

    
author

    
cowan

    
field

    
comment

    
newvalue

    
The WG decided by unanimous consent to take no action on this ticket.

    
oldvalue

    
2

    
raw-time

    
1373142044410382

    
ticket

    
518

    
time

    
2013-07-07 03:20:44

    
Change at time 2013-07-07 03:20:44

    
author

    
cowan

    
field

    
resolution

    
newvalue

    
wontfix

    
oldvalue

    

    
raw-time

    
1373142044410382

    
ticket

    
518

    
time

    
2013-07-07 03:20:44

    
Change at time 2013-07-07 03:20:44

    
author

    
cowan

    
field

    
status

    
newvalue

    
closed

    
oldvalue

    
new

    
raw-time

    
1373142044410382

    
ticket

    
518

    
time

    
2013-07-07 03:20:44

    
Change at time 2013-05-13 09:15:31

    
author

    
cowan

    
field

    
comment

    
newvalue

    
If we had worked from R6RS, it would be practically impossible to determine the changes between R5RS and R7RS-small without great (and very fallible) human efforts.  As for precision and clarity, the former does not automatically lead to the latter.  I for one do not believe that changing every occurrence of "number" to "number object" actually helped either precision ''or'' clarity.  Nor is it clear to me that the supposedly better organization of R6RS was worth sacrificing the knowledge that many Schemers have about where to find things in R5RS that helps find their analogues in R7RS-small.

    
oldvalue

    
1

    
raw-time

    
1368411331705278

    
ticket

    
518

    
time

    
2013-05-13 09:15:31