Am Di., 1. Sept. 2020 um 06:16 Uhr schrieb Arthur A. Gleckler
<xxxxxx@speechcode.com>:
>
> I've just published draft #4 of SRFI 197. It was submitted by Adam Nelson, author of the SRFI.
>
> Here are Adam's comments on the draft:
>
> There are no functional changes, but the Specification section has been updated to describe each macro fully with Syntax and Semantics sections. This is the only change.

Thank you very much for the many more details. Now it is much easier
to reason about it.

With the semantics of "chain", however, you seemed to have gone a step
back. You write "each <step> is evaluated as an application of a
procedure or syntax" while we early concluded that general syntax
doesn't make sense in <step>s. So, please replace it by "each <step>
is evaluated as an application".

This is, moreover, important for a chain like (chain + (_ 1 2)), which
should evaluate to 3. Everything else would be a very muddled
semantics. (Contrary to LISP/2's, in Scheme, the operator should not
be given special status versus the operands in an application.)