Re: [Scheme-reports] Reverting to R5RS semantics of procedure identity

[Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>]

On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x> wrote:

On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 1:22 AM, John Cowan <cowan@x> wrote:

Given the late stage of this reversal the WG has asked the SC if it has
any objections.  If there are none, the full text will be posted later.
Voting on the unmodified ninth draft will continue as before; this change
will appear in the tenth draft.

The SC has objected to making this change while the vote is ongoing.

Note this means that the current votes are for draft 9, as is.

The concern from the SC was that not only was changing mid-vote

confusing, but that there may be other issues brought up which

could also deserve special attention.

The WG is working to get this change accepted somehow after the vote.

-- 

Alex

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