On 11/30/20 2:24 PM, Arthur A. Gleckler wrote:
> I'm just following up on this conversation since it never seemed to
> reach a conclusion.
>
> Would someone be willing to propose a post-finalization note or other
> correction to the document?

I don't think we can do anything meaningful. I think we are stuck with
ambiguity. I didn't re-read the thread/documents/etc., but found my
summary in the thread and read it. How about this:

"POSIX, the GNU extensions, and this SRFI are not formally specified and
conflicting implementations do exist. For portability, you probably need
to avoid optional short arguments and required long option arguments,
but we have no proof of that statement. The SRFI author, Anthony
Carrico, declares the reference implementation to be in the public
domain. You may import the source code into your program to avoid
portability issues."

--
Anthony Carrico