> That sounds great. You could make something up, or we could all look
> for the worst example we find while working on our examples from
> existing SRFIs.
This definition of 'arg-ands' from SRFI 51 is pretty gnarly:
<code class="syntax def">(<span>arg-ands</span>
[common <<var class="opt">caller</var>>]
([<<var class="opt">caller</var>>]
<<var class="opt">variable</var>>
<<var class="opt">expr</var>>
<var class="rest">...</var>)
<var class="rest">...</var>)</code>
(syntax)
Then again, it's pretty twisty without the <var>s too.