Michael Sperber sperber
Tue Apr 12 02:37:48 EDT 2005

>>>>> "Kent" == R Kent Dybvig <dyb at cs.indiana.edu> writes:

Kent> I propose that we accept syntax-case as proposed below and direct me to
Kent> produce a more precisely worded description, with input from Matthew
Kent> and anyone else who cares to contribute, but that we leave open the
Kent> possibility that we would reconsider the pattern language if a replacement
Kent> is proposed.  What this does is insure that we have something in the
Kent> r6rs by default if efforts to produce something better falter.

Yes.  I would appreciate if you'd factor out internal DEFINE-SYNTAX as
well, or at least that we're clear we may revisit that particular
sub-issue later---I'm still quite some ways from being convinced it's
a good idea.  (More on that in the sub-thread on internal

Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla

More information about the R6RS mailing list