On 2020-10-10 03:42 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Bitvectors *are* a separate data type.  "Bytestring" is the name of a
> library, not of a data type.

Fine.  That makes sense to me.

> > bytestring=? is particularly confusing here.  It's just bytevector=?,
> > word for word.
>
> I've removed it from the SRFI and added a reference to (rnrs bytevectors)
> and the equivalent (scheme bytevector).

I've removed it from the sample implementation.  Are we going to go
ahead with the SRFI split?  If so, I'll wait for that to happen before
making any more pull requests.

Thanks for the clarifications.

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

"The Algol compiler was so poorly implemented that we dared not rely
on it, and working with assembler code was considered dishonorable.
There remained only Fortran." --Niklaus Wirth