Talk:Scheme (programming language): Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:45, 10 April 2010

Revision as of 15:17, 10 April 2010

Line 91:

: There is also the problem that this article is heavily slanted towards the still-dominant R5RS standard, and this may well change over time. For now I'm happy to continue describing R5RS and noting R6RS differences (which we don't really do a very good job of yet). If R6RS implementations, and uses of R6RS, become more popular, that will have to change. In some ways R6RS defines such a different kind of language that it may merit an entire separate article, which may or may not in time become the default article for "Scheme (programming language)". R6RS aims to be far more than the "minimalist" language described here. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|TS]] 13:44, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

:: I'm down with "Review of standard forms and procedures". A rewrite is also good, since a list of standard bindings is not that useful by itself.

:: For the actual syntax, a pointer to [[s-expression]] with a description of differences (e.g. vectors) would be good.

:: For R5RS-ness, "Distinguishing features" should list features common among all standards/implementations, and then note differences. R5RS is the base for many common features, so it's OK to describe them from R5RS point of view. But then there are common features which R5RS does not have (e.g. a module system): those should be described as well, but not from R5RS point of view (obviously).

:: Finally, I don't think we need a separate R6RS article (too many common themes), but a section devoted to each standard would be good. Such section can say something about how and when it was accepted, and then list everything that does not fit "Distinguishing features". As a bonus, we'll be able to wikify all the "[[R5RS]]" across the Wikipedia to point to the relevant section, not the generic Scheme article.

:: -- [[User:MagV|MagV]] ([[User talk:MagV|talk]]) 15:17, 10 April 2010 (UTC)