Panicz,

On 2020-07-04 08:32 +0200, Panicz Maciej Godek wrote:
> But if your contribution is to suggest a withdrawal of this document
> merely because it doesn't suit your taste, then please reconsider before
> clicking the "send" button.

I'd like it if you saw that my comments were made in the spirit of
good-faith discussion, and that I didn't suggest the withdrawal of
this SRFI.  I also agree that, ceteris paribus, pattern-matching in
Scheme's core binding forms would be immensely useful.

Since this SRFI is clearly about extending lambda, etc., perhaps
you'd consider adding additional binding forms analogous to lambda,
let, let*, and-let*, etc. to SRFI 200, which currently only provides
`match'.  It would then be possible to provide a complete
pattern-matching system using only new forms, with SRFIs 201 and 202
providing extensions for the core forms.

Best regards,

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

"I have discovered a truly marvelous implementation of this
function which this 80-column limit is too narrow to contain."
--fishythefish