This has probably been mentionned before, but the second parameter of string-fill! on page 45 has the name "char", but the text mentions the parameter "fill".  For consistency with the other ...-fill! procedures, it should be called "fill".

Moreover, the ...-fill! procedures require that both start and end be absent or present.  Couldn't the end parameter default to the length of the sequence, as is the case for other subsequence operations?  This would be more consistent, and easier to remember.

Marc

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