David Rush <kumoyuki@gmail.com> writes:

> Are we really willing to go here? I'd be up for it, but I thought that
> the community was shying away from radical changes through
> standardization, and that deep innovation in the Scheme community was
> supposed to be led by implementations.

FWIW, there is strong implementation precedent for providing this as a
module.  John Cowan's suggestion of naming the module-provided forms of
these such that they override the corresponding core forms on import (by
default) seems a good compromise; it shows what pattern matching would
look like as core syntax in R8RS, but does not put R7RS in the business
of specifying something that none of the implementations are actually
(yet) doing.

--
				Jim Wise
				jwise@draga.com

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports