(Previous discussion continued)
Re: SRFI 125 draft 8 comments John Cowan 09 May 2016 20:13 UTC

Re: SRFI 125 draft 8 comments John Cowan 09 May 2016 20:13 UTC

Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer scripsit:

> How do I atone for this?  There is no official errata process for SRFIs,
> is there?  It's a nontrivial change, too.

There are already errata for 121, 127, and 133.  My opinion is that
this is on the same scale as those are, especially 127.  In each case
the Status paragraph notes the existence of an erratum.

Art?

--
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        xxxxxx@ccil.org
With techies, I've generally found
If your arguments lose the first round
Make it rhyme, make it scan / Then you generally can
Make the same stupid point seem profound!           --Jonathan Robie