On 2011-05-01, at 23:18, Jussi Piitulainen wrote:

> I think the -u8- family of names is good precisely because there will
> be a whole family of like-named procedures in the large language. The
> main rationale for having these in the small language is, I think, to
> provide a necessary infrastructure for a larger language.

If WG2 is planning on providing READ-U16 et al, then I withdraw my suggestion. If not, I reaffirm it. :)

-- vincent

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