This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 11 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 11 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
>It seems to me that the three kinds of expressions proposed are >completely orthogonal. Then why should they all be put in one SRFI? >It forces an implementation to implement all 3 to be able to claim >(cond-expand (srfi-11 'yes)). An implementor might just implement >case-lambda, and a user might just be interested in case-lambda, but >they can't convey this information to each other through cond-expand. > >Marc You're right, and I had some doubts about this myself. I will consider splitting the SRFI up. --lars