R6RS Formal Comments & Responses

Round 3

Formal comments which were submitted after the cutoff date for Round 2 (April 9th, 2007) are listed below. Each comment is numbered for reference purposes. Comments are linked to a text file containing the text of the comment, followed by a "RESPONSE:" heading, followed by the editors' formal response.

  • Comment #237: div and mod should have examples with x1 negative
  • Comment #238: Rename bitwise-arithmetic-shift to bitwise-shift etc.
  • Comment #239: bitwise-bit-count should return -ve on -ve argument.
  • Comment #240: Lexemes #vu8( #' #` #, #,@ missing
  • Comment #241: fxlogical-shift-left and fxlogical-shift-right used but
  • Comment #242: 3-armed-if Typos
  • Comment #243: Minor improvement to lisp-transformer
  • Comment #244: Have put-datum append atmosphere
  • Comment #245: number->string and put-datum have different restrictions
  • Comment #246: Formal comment #154 resolution not implemented
  • Comment #247: Implementation-specific declarations
  • Comment #248: Report section 6.1 needs reordering
  • Comment #249: Defun example should actually implement defun
  • Comment #250: Four binding constructs should be six
  • Comment #251: (eqv? 1+2i 3+4i) should be explicitly #f
  • Comment #252: Remove reference to do in named-let
  • Comment #253: Missing word in report section 9.13
  • Comment #254: Confusing formatting in report section 9.16
  • Comment #255: Identifiers beginning with "->" considered useless
  • Comment #256: Typo "balues" in Appendix E
  • Comment #257: Missing word in make-record-constructor-descriptor
  • Comment #258: Typo "affect" in library section 8.2.2
  • Comment #259: Missing procedure make-custom-textual-input/output-port
  • Comment #260: Typo "must all belongs" in library section 14
  • Comment #261: Implementation-dependent transcoders considered harmful
  • Comment #262: Enumeration types should be reified
  • Comment #263: `#\newline' should be reinstated
  • Comment #264: Versioned names for base libraries considered harmful
  • Comment #265: Version reference syntax is overly complex.
  • Comment #266: raise semantics no longer makes sense
  • Comment #267: syntactic sugar causes cancer of the exports
  • Comment #268: multiple values and tail contexts
  • Comment #269: Library Section 11.3 "Exact bitwise arithmetic" should
  • Comment #270: Make bytevectors self-evaluating in library spec
  • Comment #271: please make square brackets more useful
  • Comment #272: please repair and simplify lexical syntax
  • Comment #273: NaN should be considered a number
  • Comment #274: Integer division examples should be written in Scheme.
  • Comment #275: Library names should be made consistent
  • Comment #276: Rationale 15.1
  • Comment #277: Transcendental Harmonization
  • Comment #278: Typos in 5.97 rationale document

  • 21 Sep 2007