Adding John Cowan, author of SRFI 235.

On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 7:01 AM Rutger van Beusekom <
[email protected]> wrote:


> I propose to change the current meaning and the implementation of both
> conjoin and disjoin in srfi-235 to the ones here below:
>

Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful report.  Alas, once a SRFI has
been finalized, its definition can't be changed.  The official way to
redefine something like that is to publish a new SRFI with the changed
definition.  That way, there's no confusion about which definition is being
used.  If you or someone else would like to do that, I'd be happy to
shepherd the new SRFI along.

I'm hoping that John will chime in, too.

Reply via email to