I vote yes. This SRFI is useful, widely supportable, and well contained. Faré's concern that additional information may be needed is valid, however the items he mentions are specific to ABI and FFI introspection, which is currently outside the scope of WG2.
-- Alex On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 8:24 AM, John Cowan <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, for personal reasons I haven't done anything on Scheme for about a > month, but I'm starting up again. > > 1) SRFI editors: please finalize SRFI 112. > > 2) WG2 members and would-be members: please vote on accepting SRFI 112 > <http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-112/srfi-112.html> as part of R7RS-large > in the (scheme inquiry) library. > > Votes will be accepted until Monday, September 23 at noon UTC. Vote > by responding to this email on the [email protected] > mailing list. A valid vote consists of either "yes" or "no", plus > any comments you want to add. If you have trouble posting, send your > vote to me and I will forward it. (Kevin Wortman, your existing vote > will stand unless you tell me otherwise.) > > -- > By Elbereth and Luthien the Fair, you shall [email protected] > have neither the Ring nor me! --Frodo http://www.ccil.org/~cowan > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "scheme-reports-wg2" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >
_______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
