Am Mo., 9. März 2020 um 18:19 Uhr schrieb John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org>:

Various people wrote:

:)

The syntax of SRFI-177 is too heavy

I agree that keyword-call and even call/kw are long, though that is within the Lisp tradition of verbose identifiers. How about providing both keyword-call (explicit) and :: (short)?

Or even shorter: ":"?

Still, it was at least not my point that the identifiers are too long, but that the more natural way would be not to use any identifier in front of the procedure.

People have written large
Lisp systems for decades. If one can be found that avoids keyword args
and is still easy to read, it would make for a good case study.

Unlikely, I think. It's difficult to write a non-trivial CL program that doesn't involve the keyword arguments of the standard library, whether application code contains keyword functions or not.

let-optionals and let-keywords

There is no real connection between these two except that Alex Shinn wrote both and put them in the same Chibi library. In particular, you can nest let-keywords in the body of let-optional, but they don't trivially interoperate the way optionals and keywords do in CL or DSSSL.

`let-optionals' is much older than Chibi. It goes back (at least) to Olin Shivers (1998).  This probably doesn't contradict what you wrote.

-- Marc