[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] 6.1 equivalence predicates
- To: Andy Wingo <wingo@x>
- Subject: Re: [Scheme-reports] 6.1 equivalence predicates
- From: John Cowan <cowan@x>
- Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 14:19:56 -0400
- Cc: scheme-reports <scheme-reports@x>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Andy Wingo scripsit:
> There is a note about uninterned symbols here, and later in 6.3.3.
> Assuming that the report specifies the behavior of report-defined
> features, and to the extent that it does not mention them, explicitly
> does not specify the behavior of any implementation extension, I suggest
> that this reference be elided. Implementation extensions can do
> whatever implementations want them to do.
Ehhh. It's a note. No change.
John Cowan cowan@x http://ccil.org/~cowan
Consider the matter of Analytic Philosophy. Dennett and Bennett are well-known.
Dennett rarely or never cites Bennett, so Bennett rarely or never cites Dennett.
There is also one Dummett. By their works shall ye know them. However, just as
no trinities have fourth persons (Zeppo Marx notwithstanding), Bummett is hardly
known by his works. Indeed, Bummett does not exist. It is part of the function
of this and other e-mail messages, therefore, to do what they can to create him.
Scheme-reports mailing list