This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 0 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 0 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
> So, in conclusion, I don't think leanness and simplicity is > sacrificed by making SRFI 0 more elaborate. I think making SRFI 0 > more elaborate is necessary to make it sufficiently useful. At this point I think we really need more input from others and particularly implementors. As I have said before SRFI-0 is at the heart of the SRFI process so we need to have something that has widespread acceptance. My views can be bent if I see that enough people want a particular form (multiway conditional, support for "and", "or", "not", etc). So I send a plea to everyone: if you have a view on this subject now is the time to voice it. Marc