> On Feb 18, 2021, at 8:14 PM, Alex Shinn <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>   Better to have a separate storage class
> for each variant.

I agree.  That’s sort of what I meant when I spoke of “bespoke” f8 storage classes.

> And whether using parameters or separate variants, f8-storage-class still needs
> a default specification.  I think you want to make it implementation
> defined, but
> then I wonder if it is of any use.  Regardless, as an implementor I
> would like to
> have agreement with other implementors on a sensible default.

The SRFI says

Implementations with an appropriate homogeneous vector type should define the associated global variable using make-storage-class, otherwise they shall define the associated global variable to #f.

I think that allows the default implementation to be #f.

I’m not recommending this, just that it is allowed if there is no reasonable default.

Brad