Re: one hundred twenty days taylanbayirli@xxxxxx 07 Jan 2016 08:17 UTC

Arthur A. Gleckler <> writes:

> This is a reminder that SRFI 125 and 126 have been under
> public discussion for over one hundred twenty days.  (They
> were first published on 7 and 8 Sep.)  The discussion can go
> on, but in theory, the longest extension was supposed to
> have been to ninety days.
> Would the authors please reply publicly with a brief update
> on the status of each SRFI?
> Thanks you very much.

We could wait for the salt & bound discussion to end, but I doubt that
it will lead to changes in SRFI-126, so we can finalize it soon.

I want to go through the sample implementations once more, and write an
SRFI-69 test suite.  I should be done within two weeks if nothing gets
in my way, then we can finalize it.