On May 3, 2011, at 2:55 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote: > I think it's a bad idea to extend the SRFI modules with new functions. > > Would it make sense to move functionality from SRFI-19 into > `racket/date' and then add the new functions there (and maybe change > the SRFI-19 implementation to re-export part of `racket/date')?
Yes, that makes sense. In my experience, the only compelling reasons to use SRFI-19 are - date->string functions - string->date functions. - conversions to & from julian dates. Any others come to mind? John
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
