On Mon 02 May 2011 11:51, Alaric Snell-Pym <alaric@snell-pym.org.uk> writes:

> Yes, I think that would be good to fix. However, I'm not too upset that
> it's not defined in WG1, as it looks like the sort of thing that will
> emerge as a de-facto standard after some trial and error, and then be
> standardised in R8RS or similar.

An aside: it really would be nice to change our report naming
convention.  "Scheme 7", "Scheme 8", etc sound much better.

Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/

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