The SRFI requires that a c64/c128vector be disjoint from an f32/f64vector, as everything must be disjoint from everything else except u8vectors, which must be the same as bytevectors. However, the former can be implemented using the latter with a trivial record wrapper, and that's how the sample implementation is going to work. 

-- 
John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        xxxxxx@ccil.org
Today an interactive brochure website, tomorrow a global content
management system that leverages collective synergy to drive "outside of
the box" thinking and formulate key objectives into a win-win game plan
with a quality-driven approach that focuses on empowering key players
to drive-up their core competencies and increase expectations with an
all-around initiative to drive up the bottom-line. --Alex Papadimoulis

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 5:46 PM, Per Bothner <xxxxxx@bothner.com> wrote:
c64vector / c128vector are (presumably deliberately) under-specified.
I'm guessing the intent is that a c64vector could/should be implemented
as using the same primitive numeric type as f32vector (i.e. a c64vector could be
implemented using a double-length f32vector).  Similarly c128vector/f64vector.

If that is the intent, I suggest some wording to that effect should be added.
(If it is there already I didn't notice it.)
--
        --Per Bothner
xxxxxx@bothner.com   http://per.bothner.com/