Kevin Ryde <user42@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> My intent is what is in the reference implementation, but given the >> difficulty in modifying the SRFI, should we just change the >> implementation? > > I suppose it depends which is considered to override the other. Not really, I think that Will is referring to this (directly from the SRFI Process Document): The final state is permanent, and the only change that may be made to such a SRFI is the updating of URLs (including related SRFIs) or noting the SRFI as deprecated, conflicted, or superseded by a subsequent SRFI. what I'm thinking though, is that maybe we could call this ~D problem a typo, and fix the SRFI document as such. Does that make sense? --Francisco
Attachment:
pgpvnWo7Fvs2k.pgp
Description: PGP signature