Discussion:
[scheme-reports-wg2] Scheme WG2 Tangerine Edition ballot
j***@gmail.com
2018-11-25 17:22:02 UTC
Permalink
I've invited you to fill out the following form:
Scheme WG2 Tangerine Edition ballot

To fill it out, visit:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUcC6nGJwwAz-mxGUtnVNuBGYhR8hQtpfdDqVBvwqarqab0A/viewform?vc=0&c=0&w=1&usp=mail_form_link

I've invited you to fill out a form:

Google Forms: Create and analyze surveys.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scheme-reports-wg2" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scheme-reports-wg2+***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Alex Shinn
2018-12-08 19:56:50 UTC
Permalink
Regarding bytevectors, I really think we should add a way to encode
bignums, e.g. the BER encodings provided by SRFI 56.
Otherwise all Scheme numbers are straightforward to encode with the other
procedures.
--
Alex
[image: Google Forms]
Having trouble viewing or submitting this form?
Fill out in Google Forms
<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUcC6nGJwwAz-mxGUtnVNuBGYhR8hQtpfdDqVBvwqarqab0A/viewform?vc=0&c=0&w=1&usp=mail_form_link>
Scheme WG2 Tangerine Edition ballot
<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUcC6nGJwwAz-mxGUtnVNuBGYhR8hQtpfdDqVBvwqarqab0A/viewform?vc=0&c=0&w=1&usp=mail_form_link>
This is a ballot to decide which SRFIs are to be included in the Tangerine
(data structures and numerics) Edition of R7RS-large. This is the second of
about 8 editions, so only certain topics are being voted on now. If you are
seeing this ballot, you are a member of Working Group 2 provided you
actually vote. However, if you have not voted on a Scheme ballot or
ratification before, please send an email to
explanation of your interest in Scheme.
Choose "No vote" if you wish to abstain, which means that your vote on
this question will not be counted. Note that if one person votes for
alternative A, and two people for alternative B, and everyone else
abstains, alternative B wins. That is because we are going by a majority of
the legal votes cast for each ballot question. If no alternative achieves a
majority, the question will be reballoted at a later date.
Otherwise, choose "None" if you wish not to include a library of the type
described in R7RS-large, or choose one of the SRFIs or R6RS according to
the choices given. You can also choose "Other" for a write-in vote.
There are also some yes/no questions on the ballot, for which the answers
are "No vote", "No", and "Yes".
If you want to revote, just vote again using the same name. Only the last
vote is counted. The ballot closes at the last moment of Friday, February
1, 2019, in any time zone, which is equivalent to noon February 2 UTC.
All ballots will be made public. If you object to using Google Forms (you
do not need a Google account), post your ballot in an email to
to other fora will be used if I see them, but are not formally supported.
0. What is your name? *
Please use your real name, or the name by which you are commonly known
if you don't use your real name.
1. What string library should R7RS provide? *
This was balloted in the Red Edition, but inconclusively.
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 13 (comprehensive, index-based)
- SRFI 130 (useful subset of 13, cursor-based)
- SRFI 152 (useful subset of 13, index-based, meant to be used with
texts)
2. What persistent mapping library should R7Rs-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 146 (provides both ordered trees and hash array mapped tries)
3. What regular expression library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 115 (combinator-based)
4. Should the existing generator library be enhanced with the dual
type, accumulators? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 127 (Red Edition status quo, no accumulators)
- SRFI 158 (upward compatible extensions plus accumulators)
5. What integer division library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None (R7RS-small status quo of truncate and floor only)
- SRFI 141 (provides ceiling, round, Euclidean, and balanced)
6. What bitwise integer operations library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 151 (comprehensive, merges SRFI 33 and SRFI 60)
- R6RS (subset of SRFI 60)
7. What fixnum library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 143 (R6RS + extensions)
- R6RS
8. What flonum library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 144 (merger of R6RS and C99 <math.h>)
- R6RS
9. What bytevector library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- R6RS
10. What homogeneous numeric vector library should R7RS-large provide?
*
Note: The specification for SRFI 160 is stable, but the implementation
is not yet stable. This note should be removed later on.
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 4 (very limited procedures, integers and floats only)
- SRFI 160 (analogue of Red Edition vector library, adds bits and
inexact complex numbers)
11. What formatting library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 48 (template-based, subset of Common Lisp)
- SRFI 159 (combinator-based, comprehensive)
12. Should R7RS-large systems be required to provide bignums? *
This means that all arithmetic operations except / are closed under
the integers, modulo storage and format limitations.
- No vote
- No
- Yes
13. Should R7RS-large systems be required to provide ratios? *
This means that / is closed under the integers, modulo storage and
format limitations.
- No vote
- No
- Yes
14. Should R7RS-large systems be required to provide inexact real
numbers? *
- No vote
- No
- Yes
15. Should R7RS-large systems be required to provide inexact complex
numbers? *
- No vote
- No
- Yes
16. Should R7RS-large systems be required to provide exact complex
numbers? *
- No vote
- No
- Yes
Never submit passwords through Google Forms.
Powered by
[image: Google Forms]
<https://www.google.com/forms/about/?utm_source=product&utm_medium=forms_logo&utm_campaign=forms>
This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google.
Report Abuse
<https://docs.google.com/forms/u/0/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUcC6nGJwwAz-mxGUtnVNuBGYhR8hQtpfdDqVBvwqarqab0A/reportabuse?source=https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUcC6nGJwwAz-mxGUtnVNuBGYhR8hQtpfdDqVBvwqarqab0A/viewform?sid%3D1193d0b07026a443%26vc%3D0%26c%3D0%26w%3D1%26token%3DkY4FTGcBAAA.PtUNsUCEPKSpifSgbuqEIw.-uCLue8JaWW7-qWQUnc8qg>
- Terms of Service <http://www.google.com/accounts/TOS> - Additional Terms
<http://www.google.com/google-d-s/terms.html>
Create your own Google Form
<https://docs.google.com/forms?usp=mail_form_link>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"scheme-reports-wg2" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scheme-reports-wg2" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scheme-reports-wg2+***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
John Cowan
2018-12-08 20:28:08 UTC
Permalink
I agree. My current proposal is at
https://bitbucket.org/cowan/r7rs-wg1-infra/src/default/BignumEncodingCowan.md
and it is scheduled for the Orange Edition. Because the implementation can
mostly reuse SRFI 52, it's not on the straw poll, but it will be on the
ballot.
Post by Alex Shinn
Regarding bytevectors, I really think we should add a way to encode
bignums, e.g. the BER encodings provided by SRFI 56.
Otherwise all Scheme numbers are straightforward to encode with the other
procedures.
--
Alex
[image: Google Forms]
Having trouble viewing or submitting this form?
Fill out in Google Forms
<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUcC6nGJwwAz-mxGUtnVNuBGYhR8hQtpfdDqVBvwqarqab0A/viewform?vc=0&c=0&w=1&usp=mail_form_link>
Scheme WG2 Tangerine Edition ballot
<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUcC6nGJwwAz-mxGUtnVNuBGYhR8hQtpfdDqVBvwqarqab0A/viewform?vc=0&c=0&w=1&usp=mail_form_link>
This is a ballot to decide which SRFIs are to be included in the
Tangerine (data structures and numerics) Edition of R7RS-large. This is the
second of about 8 editions, so only certain topics are being voted on now.
If you are seeing this ballot, you are a member of Working Group 2 provided
you actually vote. However, if you have not voted on a Scheme ballot or
ratification before, please send an email to
explanation of your interest in Scheme.
Choose "No vote" if you wish to abstain, which means that your vote on
this question will not be counted. Note that if one person votes for
alternative A, and two people for alternative B, and everyone else
abstains, alternative B wins. That is because we are going by a majority of
the legal votes cast for each ballot question. If no alternative achieves a
majority, the question will be reballoted at a later date.
Otherwise, choose "None" if you wish not to include a library of the type
described in R7RS-large, or choose one of the SRFIs or R6RS according to
the choices given. You can also choose "Other" for a write-in vote.
There are also some yes/no questions on the ballot, for which the answers
are "No vote", "No", and "Yes".
If you want to revote, just vote again using the same name. Only the last
vote is counted. The ballot closes at the last moment of Friday, February
1, 2019, in any time zone, which is equivalent to noon February 2 UTC.
All ballots will be made public. If you object to using Google Forms (you
do not need a Google account), post your ballot in an email to
posted to other fora will be used if I see them, but are not formally
supported.
0. What is your name? *
Please use your real name, or the name by which you are commonly
known if you don't use your real name.
1. What string library should R7RS provide? *
This was balloted in the Red Edition, but inconclusively.
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 13 (comprehensive, index-based)
- SRFI 130 (useful subset of 13, cursor-based)
- SRFI 152 (useful subset of 13, index-based, meant to be used
with texts)
2. What persistent mapping library should R7Rs-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 146 (provides both ordered trees and hash array mapped tries)
3. What regular expression library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 115 (combinator-based)
4. Should the existing generator library be enhanced with the dual
type, accumulators? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 127 (Red Edition status quo, no accumulators)
- SRFI 158 (upward compatible extensions plus accumulators)
5. What integer division library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None (R7RS-small status quo of truncate and floor only)
- SRFI 141 (provides ceiling, round, Euclidean, and balanced)
6. What bitwise integer operations library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 151 (comprehensive, merges SRFI 33 and SRFI 60)
- R6RS (subset of SRFI 60)
7. What fixnum library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 143 (R6RS + extensions)
- R6RS
8. What flonum library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 144 (merger of R6RS and C99 <math.h>)
- R6RS
9. What bytevector library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- R6RS
10. What homogeneous numeric vector library should R7RS-large
provide? *
Note: The specification for SRFI 160 is stable, but the
implementation is not yet stable. This note should be removed later on.
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 4 (very limited procedures, integers and floats only)
- SRFI 160 (analogue of Red Edition vector library, adds bits and
inexact complex numbers)
11. What formatting library should R7RS-large provide? *
- No vote
- None
- SRFI 48 (template-based, subset of Common Lisp)
- SRFI 159 (combinator-based, comprehensive)
12. Should R7RS-large systems be required to provide bignums? *
This means that all arithmetic operations except / are closed under
the integers, modulo storage and format limitations.
- No vote
- No
- Yes
13. Should R7RS-large systems be required to provide ratios? *
This means that / is closed under the integers, modulo storage and
format limitations.
- No vote
- No
- Yes
14. Should R7RS-large systems be required to provide inexact real
numbers? *
- No vote
- No
- Yes
15. Should R7RS-large systems be required to provide inexact complex
numbers? *
- No vote
- No
- Yes
16. Should R7RS-large systems be required to provide exact complex
numbers? *
- No vote
- No
- Yes
Never submit passwords through Google Forms.
Powered by
[image: Google Forms]
<https://www.google.com/forms/about/?utm_source=product&utm_medium=forms_logo&utm_campaign=forms>
This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google.
Report Abuse
<https://docs.google.com/forms/u/0/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUcC6nGJwwAz-mxGUtnVNuBGYhR8hQtpfdDqVBvwqarqab0A/reportabuse?source=https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeUcC6nGJwwAz-mxGUtnVNuBGYhR8hQtpfdDqVBvwqarqab0A/viewform?sid%3D1193d0b07026a443%26vc%3D0%26c%3D0%26w%3D1%26token%3DkY4FTGcBAAA.PtUNsUCEPKSpifSgbuqEIw.-uCLue8JaWW7-qWQUnc8qg>
- Terms of Service <http://www.google.com/accounts/TOS> - Additional
Terms <http://www.google.com/google-d-s/terms.html>
Create your own Google Form
<https://docs.google.com/forms?usp=mail_form_link>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"scheme-reports-wg2" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"scheme-reports-wg2" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scheme-reports-wg2" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scheme-reports-wg2+***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Loading...