On 2020-09-05 12:15 +0200, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen wrote:
> Exactly the same procedures that make sense for vector literals make sense
> for ranges.

OK, I think I understand now.  So you'd like the specification to
state something like "the range type may not be disjoint from the type
of Scheme vectors, but it is an error to mutate a range"?  Or are there
other specific changes?

Is John willing to consider making such a change to the spec of the
range type?  Since he's the mufti of this SRFI, if the answer is no,
we should table the discussion in this context, at least.

During these discussions it can be hard to keep track of what
concrete changes are being proposed.  I think we'll be able to resolve
this quickly if we can stick to what we want to do with the current
SRFI.

--
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe  <xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz>

"More shall come after us than have gone before; the world
is not yet middle-aged." --Herman Melville, _White-Jacket_