[R6RS] naming convention for procedures

[Anton van Straaten]

Anton van Straaten wrote:
> I wrote:
> 
>> I notice that the "Entry format" section (3.1) does not list "proc" or 
>> "procedure" as a naming convention which implies a type restriction. 
>> I'm thinking it should.
>>
>> Currently, both "proc" and "procedure" are used for this purpose in 
>> different places - "procedure" most notably in arithmetic and hash 
>> tables.  R5RS used "proc" for e.g. map and for-each (and similarly 
>> didn't mention it in the "Entry format" section.
>>
>> I'm going with "proc" for the stuff I'm responsible for, until I hear 
>> otherwise.
> 
> 
> P.S. I forgot that "if a parameter name is also the name of a type, then 
> the corresponding argument must be of the named type."  That would argue 
> for using "procedure".  Either way, it should probably still be listed 
> explicitly, if we're going to list other base type names.
> 
> (I notice that R5RS only listed names that were not the name of a type.)

I've added 'proc' as a type restriction in "5.1 Entry format".  It's 
easy to delete if it shouldn't be there. :)