> 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.