On 2011-05-01, at 23:18, Jussi Piitulainen wrote: > I think the -u8- family of names is good precisely because there will > be a whole family of like-named procedures in the large language. The > main rationale for having these in the small language is, I think, to > provide a necessary infrastructure for a larger language.
If WG2 is planning on providing READ-U16 et al, then I withdraw my suggestion. If not, I reaffirm it. :) -- vincent _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
