[R6RS] Timeline for R6RS SRFIs

Marc Feeley feeley
Thu Jun 2 14:42:53 EDT 2005

On 2-Jun-05, at 10:14 AM, Michael Sperber wrote:

> Sure, but note that we never said we'd *only* cover the minimal
> requirements.  This was mainly in the interest of saving time and
> work.  Given that a lot of the work has already been done, it's not

It is not mainly about saving time and work.  It is mainly about  
reaching consensus in the limited time we have left.  A big proposal  
(such as SRFI 68) is bound to be more controversial than a small one.


More information about the R6RS mailing list