Hi Artyom and the SRFI 253 list, I haven’t had a chance to review the SRFI in depth yet, but I noticed that it does not specify (beyond the infamous “it is an error”) what happens when a type-check fails. This is a problem. There’s little point in checking values if the implementation can happily ignore failures—which is allowed in this case, per R7RS semantics.
I strongly suggest that a failed type check should cause an exception with type &assertion to be raised. (People who know more about R6 than I do may be able to suggest a more specific condition type.) On systems that don’t have R6RS condition types, the local equivalent of an assertion violation should occur, or an error that satisfies a predicate ‘check-error?’ (to be defined by the SRFI) should be raised. But something should happen, in any case! -- Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe <[email protected]>
