[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Drop enumerations library?

[Michael Sperber]

AndrevanTonder <andre at het.brown.edu> writes:

> offer a very lightweight way of supporting operations on the sets,
> while remaining completely compatible with a future enumerations
> library? 

If an enumerations library is in the future anyway, and one exists in
the present tense, why wait?  (Unless you have a complaint about the
specific design of the R6RS library.)

> On the other hand, while I have been arguing for leaving enumerations
> out, I was wondering why enumerations, given that they are in the
> report, are not used for record field name sets, which seems to be a
> natural application of them. If they were useful for that, it might
> provide more of a rationale for having them.  If, on the other hand,
> they are not useful for record field names, that would i.m.o. count
> against them.

Because the record field names are ordered, I would think.

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla