SRFI 129: 90 days Arthur A. Gleckler (29 Feb 2016 03:13 UTC)
Re: SRFI 129: 90 days John Cowan (29 Feb 2016 03:22 UTC)

Re: SRFI 129: 90 days John Cowan 29 Feb 2016 03:21 UTC

Arthur A. Gleckler scripsit:
> This is just a reminder that SRFI 129 reaches the end of its
> extended ninety-day discussion period today.  (It was first
> published on 30 Nov 2015.)  The discussion can go on, but in
> theory, the longest extension is supposed to be to ninety
> days.

I'm requesting LAST CALL and then finalization after a week, unless
something comes up.

--
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        xxxxxx@ccil.org
Almost all theorems are true, but almost all proofs have bugs.
        --Paul Pedersen