On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 17:32:57 -0800 (PST), Taylor Campbell
<xxxxxx@bloodandcoffee.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Christopher Dutchyn wrote:
>
>[...whether a propose R6RS extension should be SRFIized...]

I think until R6RS is officially announced, we should make absolutely no
assumptions about its contents. The last progress report is after all just a
progress report, things may change.

So please let's not get bogged down with gratuitous assumptions about
how this SRFI may influence forthcoming standards. SRFI-62 is already
in wide use, highly practical and easy to implement..

cheers,
felix