SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small John Cowan (28 Oct 2015 13:26 UTC)
Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Sven Hartrumpf (28 Oct 2015 13:43 UTC)
Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small John Cowan (28 Oct 2015 14:20 UTC)
Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Shiro Kawai (28 Oct 2015 14:57 UTC)
Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small John Cowan (28 Oct 2015 16:13 UTC)
Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Shiro Kawai (29 Oct 2015 01:36 UTC)
Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Taylor R Campbell (28 Oct 2015 15:49 UTC)
Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small John Cowan (28 Oct 2015 16:16 UTC)
Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Taylor R Campbell (28 Oct 2015 16:50 UTC)
Re: [scheme-reports-wg2] SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Arthur A. Gleckler (28 Oct 2015 21:25 UTC)
Re: [scheme-reports-wg2] SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Alex Shinn (02 Nov 2015 06:16 UTC)
Re: [scheme-reports-wg2] SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small John Cowan (02 Nov 2015 13:56 UTC)
Re: [scheme-reports-wg2] SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Shiro Kawai (02 Nov 2015 14:17 UTC)
Re: [scheme-reports-wg2] SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Alex Shinn (02 Nov 2015 15:18 UTC)
Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Sudarshan S Chawathe (30 Oct 2015 21:10 UTC)
Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small John Cowan (31 Oct 2015 15:44 UTC)
Re: [scheme-reports-wg2] SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Faré (02 Nov 2015 23:08 UTC)
Re: [scheme-reports-wg2] SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small John Cowan (04 Nov 2015 01:59 UTC)
Re: [scheme-reports-wg2] SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Faré (04 Nov 2015 05:53 UTC)

Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small Sudarshan S Chawathe 30 Oct 2015 21:10 UTC

Regarding preferences among options 1--4 posted in an earlier message, I
would prefer option 2, then 3, then 1, and (by a big margin) 4 last.

Option 3 certainly adds many names and bulk but I don't think the
conceptual load is very high given the common pattern.

On a related note, I think SRFI-43 has continuing value despite the
existence of foof-loop (which is certainly very useful when the added
features are desired).  One compelling reason for me is that I find SRFI
43 can be digested much more quickly than foof-loop (by someone familiar
with RnRS definitions and conventions in general), but that may well be
something specific to me.

Regards,

-chaw