[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Corrected reference implementation
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005, Matthew D Swank wrote:
Fair enough, but the difference in the implementation code is subtle
enough to look like a typo.
I agree. This has confused others also, probably mostly because of the
unfortunate choice of calling the second CONTENT by the same name as the first.
If I were to write this again, I would either call it something like
for clarity, or insist on including the comments that are in SRFI-45 in the