> Aha, so as long as something is wrapped we don't see the same kind of
> inlining.
Correct.
> So what would this look like? I can see fx+ above, which uses
> `chicken:fx+` (prefixed, 2-arity) and foldr to accomplish its multi-arg
> case. Is adding `(inline-file)` to the srfi-143.egg enough
I now understand that chicken's srfi-143 egg has a different spec from
actual SRFI-143; in particular, the egg's procedures are variadic, whereas
the SRFI's procedures were intended not to be. Unfortunately, the SRFI
specifies =, <, etc. to be variadic instead of dyadic as a result of cut
and
