First, I should say upfront that I think indentation-sensitive
syntax is a Bad Idea.

Second, I should say upfron that I think scheme is one of the
worst *POSSIBLE* languages to apply indentation-sensitive syntax
to.

If this SRFI is implemented, I will stop using any scheme that
implements it and enables it by default.

Okay?  You understand where I'm at on this whole proposal, right?

Now, understanding that this is a bad idea in the first place,
allowing mixed spaces and tabs is the worst possible way to do it.
Even the pythonistas, who have a language that indentation-sensitive
syntax (sorta) works for, have had no end of fights over tabs and
spaces, and they're now in the process of banning them.

Understanding that it's the worst design for a bad idea, reading
a tab as equal to FOUR spaces is the worst possible number that
could have been plugged into this design.  Standard editing software
assumes tabs are EIGHT spaces by default; two of your FOUR space
tabs will line up exactly with people's expectation of where a single
EIGHT space tab should be, and hence cock up their thinking about the
code as well as cocking up the code itself.

I probably won't check back into this particular SRFI thread; I'll
just take it as a warning that there are idiots out there who would
do this, and implementation of it as a sign from God that the
implementor has in fact gone insane and that their scheme should be
avoided in the future.

					Bear