Kevin Ryde <user42@zip.com.au> writes:

>> My intent is what is in the reference implementation, but given the
>> difficulty in modifying the SRFI, should we just change the
>> implementation?
>
> I suppose it depends which is considered to override the other.

Not really, I think that Will is referring to this (directly from the
SRFI Process Document):

   The final state is permanent, and the only change that may be made
   to such a SRFI is the updating of URLs (including related SRFIs) or
   noting the SRFI as deprecated, conflicted, or superseded by a
   subsequent SRFI.

what I'm thinking though, is that maybe we could call this ~D problem
a typo, and fix the SRFI document as such.  Does that make sense?

--Francisco