Dear Matthias,
Would you be willing to share your thoughts about the history of
denotational versus operational semantics in the report?
Thanks.
==============================================================
Arthur Nunes-Harwitt
Computer Science Department, Rochester Institute of Technology
Room 70-3509
585-475-4916
==============================================================
"I don't know what the language of the future will be
called, but it will look like LISP."
This email is confidential and intended for the named recipient(s). In
the event the email is received by someone other than the recipient,
please notify the sender at a...@cs.rit.edu.
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
Let me inject some comments that make it a bit more obvious what’s happening
here:
On Feb 26, 2019, at 3:33 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <sa...@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
RnRS meetings from 1984 thru 2003 adhere to the “unanimity rule” originating
from the MIT group.
In 2001, I created and ran “Scheme and Functional Programming” (SFP), a first
annual Scheme workshop that also subsumed “Scheme Report” meetings.
2003: New Scheme Standard proposed at the Scheme Workshop
At the 2003 Boston SFP, I proposed going to a majority rule so that the Scheme
standard could grow into a useful language after a long long day, with many
people gone. The motion passed.
2006: First draft of R6RS released
2007: R6RS Ratified by community vote after extensive discussion and revision
I wrote an essay entitled “The R6RS is Perfect”. The certification vote
succeeded with just a few votes more than needed (60% or 66% or something like
that).
2009: A new Scheme Standard steering committee elected by a community
vote. The new committee reflected opposition to the R6RS.
(as in “community vote” by another Scheme workshop)
We, the Racketeers, didn’t want to be in their way so we wrote this:
https://racket-lang.org/new-name.html
History is history. The future you can change, unless Gödel is right about
Einstein’s equations and it’s practical.
— Matthias
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
