On 2022-09-16 16:39 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Your interpretation is right and the implementation is borked, I don't know
> why.

No, I’m very sorry, the implementation(s) are fine.  I don’t know how
I happened to get that result.  Shiro’s (and my) implementations both
defer to SRFI 1 ‘zip’, which correctly gives ((1) (2) (3)) in that
example.

Again, sorry for the noise.

--
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe  <xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz>