> From: Taylor Campbell <xxxxxx@evdev.ath.cx>

    > Would you rather that we define sixteen concrete collection
    > SRFIs all with their own inconsistent interfaces, withdraw them
    > all to write a collection interface SRFI, breaking any code
    > written with them, only to rewrite them _again_ with a new
    > collection SRFI?

I'd rather that you write the concrete srfis, give them consistent
interfaces by your own good grace, write some srfis to support generic
functions, and _then_ write a generic collections interface.

Do you play pool?  A favorable reading of 44 is that you've "called
your shot".  In this case, it's more like "called your next 4 shots".
Ok, noted.  But calling a shot ain't a shot -- ain't a srfi.   The
game isn't the shots you call, it's the shots you make.

You're doing things out of order.  A not bad place to _start_ would be
to _first_ have srfis that let you kill the "Issues" section of 44.

    > Please show us the correct place to submit meta-SRFIs, then.

comp.lang.scheme

-t