[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