> Because it's a silly name.  The term has always been "hash table";
 > only Java (and C# which cloned Java) and R6RS use "hashtable", which
 > in English looks like "hasht-able" with the suffix "-able" added to a
 > nonexistent verb "hasht".
I see your point, I've always considered hashtable as one word. Maybe
I've got too used to Java way.

 > We are stuck with "bytevector" now, but there are still a lot of
 > programs using SRFI 69 and "hash-table".
However, R6RS is standard and SRFI 69 is still SRFI. IMO, we should
stuck with 'hashtable', especially if the hashtable APIs will be a part
of R7RS. But this is off topic since it's not relative at all.

Cheers,

_/_/
Takashi Kato
E-mail: xxxxxx@ymail.com