> Larry is the equivalent of Lassi: both names are originally nicknames
> for Laurentius, who was martyred in 228, supposedly by being roasted on
> a red-hot griddle.  When he had suffered for a long time, he said "Turn
> me over, I'm well-done on this side!", which is why he is the patron
> saint of cooks – and comedians.

That's right. The Finnish name Lauri is equivalent to Larry or Lars, and
is a folksy version of Laurentius. Lassi, in turn, is an even more
folksy version of Lauri. Lauri is the more common name; Lassi is less
common but still standard.

The Swedish name Lasse is equivalent to Lassi. Since Finland has a
Swedish-speaking minority and frequent contact with Swedish culture, we
also many Lasses and the two names are frequently confused.

I didn't know about the roasting. What a way to leave.

> If this means a grand unified condition system, it isn't going to fly.
> One of the big obstacles to R6RS adoption was the fact that every
> Scheme's condition system is hopelessly inconsistent with the rest.
>
> I had a sketch of what a predicate-based rather than type-based
> condition system would look like, but I consider it obsolete now.

I think we can simply provide an API to creating an exception object
with the given fields, a predicate to test for such objects, and an API
to extract the field values back from an exception object.

We don't need to provide a mechanism for raising or catching the
exceptions; we should be able to bank on each Scheme implementation's
existing facilities for that?