Aubrey Jaffer scripsit:

> But SET->BAG! has two arguments; which comparator is used?

I've changed the text to say the comparators must be the same, which
was my intention, and fixed the code to verify it.  Note that the
"Specification" section says "It is an error for any procedure defined
in this SRFI to be invoked on sets or bags with distinct comparators
(in the sense of eq?)."

The new text and code are in the same place.

--
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        xxxxxx@ccil.org
One art / There is / No less / No more
To do / All things / With sparks / Galore   --Douglas Hofstadter