On Apr 4, 2012, at 9:28 AM, Ray Racine wrote: > Stay in the scheme sphere long enough everyone has their SRFI moment and one > concerning SRFI-19 in particular. Here I refer to the, "that's it, I can't > stand no more, by god, this time I'm going replace SRFI-19" moment. > > A couple of months back I had my nth moment with SRFI-19 and my usual > partial response. > > https://github.com/RayRacine/racketlib/tree/datetime/src/racket/datetime > > In SRFI-19's defense, unsurprisingly, the overall approach and design of > SRFI-19 captures the gist of what needs to be done. That said, I did spend > the rest of the morning cut and pasting a few core aspects of SRFI-19 around > (core being those features I immediately needed). > > FWIW, I seem to recall the current Racket impl is missing a couple of leap > second adjustments in the current release. > > Overall I agree a number of SRFIs should be tidied up a bit, ported to > modernized Racket syntax and added as part of the standard Racket > collections. But who has the time?
Well, I agree. That's why I want to break it up into teeny tiny pieces that I can do in half an hour and plausibly add to the core. A quick scan of your repository suggests that you were also focused on julian<->date conversions and on formatting. Is this a fair summary? John ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
