> Olin writes:

>> This seems like a waste of a SRFI to me.

>>>>> On Wed, 24 Nov 1999 12:02:06 -0500, Lars Thomas Hansen <xxxxxx@ccs.neu.edu> said:

> To each his own.  I guess the editors felt differently.

Not necessarily.  The editors try to maintain quality and consistency,
but aren't allowed to officially *feel* anything about the
appropriateness of a proposal.

Personally, I'd like to not have too many SRFIs that are unused
because they were too short-sighted.  I'd be a lot happier if all of
the SRFIs were such that most implementers felt they were appropriate
(or even essential) to support.

../Dave (not writing as an Editor :-)