scheme-reports-wg1

The motivation behind (<pat> <ellipsis> . <id>) was to allow an ellipsis in

> On Nov 22, 2022, at 1:09 AM, Arthur A. Gleckler <scheme@speechcode.com> wrote: > >

Listed as errata 31 and 32 in <https://github.com/johnwcowan/r7rs-work/blob/master/R7RSSmallErrata

Good idea. Brad On 6/26/22 10:01 AM, John Cowan wrote: > > I think this should become an

1. Matching does _not_ require the identifier be bound to work, so your observation adds nothing new

On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 3:50 PM Daphne Preston-Kendal <dpk@nonceword.org> wrote: Section 6.2.5

The parameterize form in R7RS is, at best, underspecified if read favorably. The R7RS reads: "

Am Di., 3. Aug. 2021 um 10:46 Uhr schrieb Alex Shinn <alexshinn@gmail.com>: I'm trying to

There are good reasons to maintain due process. If nothing else, it provides an editing cycle, which

Hello John, What you describe is a plausible scenario where the specified semantics work. But a

As originally written, `guard` invokes `raise-continuable` when none of the guard clauses is

Andy WIngo pointed out on #guile that the definition of `symbol=?` has the same problem as the

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 3:16 PM Alex Shinn <alexshinn@gmail.com> wrote: Allowing Numeric

Voting is now closed on the Tangerine Edition ballot and the accompanying Orange Edition straw poll.

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 3:20 PM Ivan Raikov <ivan.g.raikov@gmail.com> wrote: Isn't the

I have sent a request to the SRFI Editor to remove all references to u1vectors (bitvectors) from SRFI

Ok, now I believe what you're proposing is scoping labels to the file / textual-port they are

Nobody has voted in the last eight days. To make reaching the forms easier, I have created two short

Nobody speaks for WG1 nowadays, but your message is duly forwarded. As for giving R5RS semantics to

I received this report with a request to forward it to WG1. You who receive this message are WG1 for

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Aaron W. Hsu <arcfide@sacrideo.us> wrote: Oi Oi Oi! LOL, this

I have uploaded the repo for the R7RS-small report to <https://bitbucket.org/cowan/r7rs>.

On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 8:53 PM, William D Clinger <will@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: That, however, is

Formal semantics folks should look at this. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mark H

CC-ing <scheme-reports-wg1>. On Oct 31, 2016 8:12 AM, "Alex Shinn" <alexshinn@

The R7RS Red Edition ballot is now complete, with 28 votes counted. * All unopposed SRFIs passed

I have done minor surgery on two ballots. One person voted for SRFI 135 as a string library, and also

Alex Shinn scripsit: > If I understand, the errata is to clarify only one thing, that: > > (

Here's another message from Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (on <comp.lang.scheme>): From: Marc

Marc, who started this thread originally on <comp.lang.scheme>, asked me to post his reply to