Re: [Scheme-reports] [r6rs-discuss] returning back to pattern matching

[John Cowan <cowan@x>]

Andre van Tonder scripsit:

>> It definitely will, probably either Taylor Campbell's or Olin Shivers's.
>> No :-) at all.
>
> Why?  

Because WG2 so voted.  All of you had ample opportunity to join it,
but for whatever reason you couldn't or didn't, so you don't get a
vote at this point.

(If anyone wants to join now, let me know.  We could use warm blood.)

> have not even gone through the SRFI process.  This is too close to 
> The big problem that many of us had with R6RS were the pieces where 
> certain editors forced their own favorite "cool" but experimental ideas 
> into the standard.

Where they became mandatory.  This stuff is *not mandatory*.

-- 
Even the best of friends cannot                 John Cowan
attend each others' funeral.                    cowan@x
        --Kehlog Albran, The Profit             http://www.ccil.org/~cowan

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