Re: SRFI 43 vs. R7RS-small John Cowan 31 Oct 2015 15:44 UTC

Sudarshan S Chawathe scripsit:

> 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.

I'm inclined to agree.  Loop syntax is very different from the rest of Scheme.

John Cowan
    "Any legal document draws most of its meaning from context.  A telegram
    that says 'SELL HUNDRED THOUSAND SHARES IBM SHORT' (only 190 bits in
    5-bit Baudot code plus appropriate headers) is as good a legal document
    as any, even sans digital signature." --me