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 http://www.ccil.org/~cowan xxxxxx@ccil.org
"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