>>>>> "felix" == felix  <xxxxxx@call-with-current-continuation.org> writes:

felix> But the problem I see with *this* SRFI is that it specifies too
felix> much (IMHO). If SRFI-50 is considered a (slightly) portable FFI
felix> to C, then things could be done considerably simpler, safer and
felix> completely portable (up to a certain point).  If SRFI-50 is
felix> only about a semi-standard way of messing with Scheme internals
felix> at the C level, then I'll keep my mouth shut from now on...

To be honest, you've lost me in a twisty maze of natural-language
semantics.

*What*?

--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla