> Aubrey Jaffer wrote:
> > I think having SRFI-101 shadow R6RS identifiers is the most common way
> > that SRFI-101 would be used.

Is this true?  Since srfi-101's data structure is incompatible
to the built-in pairs, you can't pass srfi-101 list to the
imported procedures that expects built-in list, and vice versa.
(Or am I missing something?)

If you import srfi-101 shadowing r6rs list primitives, you
pretty much commit to live in srfi-101 world, isolated from
other libraries that deal with native lists.   That's ok
for experimental work, but for practical applications
I'd rather imagine that it'd be more common to import srfi-101
procedures with prefix, and the user converts normal lists
and srfi-101 lists as needed.

--shiro