> From: Lassi Kortela <xxxxxx@lassi.io>
> Date: Sunday, August 16, 2020 9:06 AM
>
> [ More of us both talking past each other, but I'm done with
>   talking, I'm waiting on a decision. ]
>
>> I don't see the linkage here.  What would be exotic enough that it
>> can't be represented by all three of the above options? They're all
>> lists of one sort or another.
>
> By exotic properties I meant ones related SQL, HTTP, IRC and various
> others that are not urgent for SRFI 170.

But those are items *collected* in the three different types of lists,
right?  Alists, plist, optional arguments at the end of a procedure's
signature are just equivalent ways to collect key/value pairs.  Except
for the trickiness lists as values for alists.

All I want here is a decision on which 1-2 of the above will be used
in the API.  You don't want plists because they're not (yet) in any
way in the Scheme world standardized with useful manipulation
procedures, that's a good argument.  I want to avoid alist list value
trickiness.  Not sure about the args at the end of a procedure's
arguments option, it looks like an implicit plist to me.

If we choose the latter for input, we still need to decide what's the
return value of foreign-status-[alist or plist or whatever].

> [...]

- Harold