|     * To: Taylor Campbell <xxxxxx@evdev.ath.cx>
 |     * Subject: Re: octothorpe array syntax; other comments
 |     * From: bear <xxxxxx@sonic.net>
 |     * Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:43:57 -0800 (PST)
 |     * Cc: srfi-47@srfi.schemers.org
 |     * Delivered-to: srfi-47@srfi.schemers.org
 |     * In-reply-to: <0DF498F0-14C6-11D8-A8E3-000A95CCCEE4@evdev.ath.cx>
 |     * References: <0DF498F0-14C6-11D8-A8E3-000A95CCCEE4@evdev.ath.cx>
 |
 | On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Taylor Campbell wrote:
 |
 | I think I agree that we shouldn't need new octothorpe constructs
 | for arrays:  In fact, the vectors-of-vectors-of-vectors... syntax
 | should work just fine for them:
 |
 | #( #( a0 a1 a2)
 |    #( b0 b1 b2)
 |    #( c0 c1 c2))

What would the rank of #( #( a0 a1 a2) #( b0 b1 b2)) be?

How about #( #( a0 a1 a2) a5 ) ?

How about #( #( a0 a1 a2) #( a5)) ?