Alaric Snell-Pym scripsit:

> I suspect that a "common consensus" on the set of SRFIs that makes a
> "practical implementation" will emerge organically, and predicting that
> set to mandate it now will be difficult :-)

I think the bar should and and will be low to add a SRFI (or R6RS
section) as an optional library.  To add it as a mandatory library,
one that the user can always count on having, will be more difficult,
but I still expect a fair number of them.

The most difficult thing will be the extensions to library declarations,
because they don't even make sense in non R7RS-systems and can't be
implemented in portable R7RS-small.  I have a tentative proposal at
<http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/wiki/LibraryDeclarationsCowan> but I'm going
to be slow to bring it to a vote.

--
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan@ccil.org
Being understandable rather than obscurantist poses certain
risks, in that one's opinions are clear and therefore falsifiable
in the light of new data, but it has the advantage of encouraging
feedback from others.  --James A. Matisoff

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