[Scheme-reports] Formal Response #438: Inconsistency of sequence copying procedures

[John Cowan <cowan@x>]

This is a Formal Response to Formal Comment #438:

Inconsistency of sequence copying procedures

The WG voted to adopt this proposal in principle.  In particular:

1) Vectors are now self-evaluating.

2) The functional procedures {list,string,bytevector}-copy are provided,
with a required source argument, and with optional start and end
arguments.  The list-copy procedure does not allow optional arguments.

3) The substring procedure is retained for backward compatibility.

4) The mutating procedures {list,string,bytevector}-copy! are provided,
with required destination, destination index, and source arguments, and
with optional start and end arguments.  No fill argument is provided.
There is no list-copy! procedure.

If you are dissatisfied with this Formal Response, please let us know.
Thank you for participating in the R7RS process.

-- 
John Cowan                              <cowan@x>
            http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
                .e'osai ko sarji la lojban.
                Please support Lojban!          http://www.lojban.org

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports