[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] forall should be for-all for consistency with for-each

[Trent Buck]

On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 12:38:03PM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> Arthur A. Gleckler scripsit:
> 
> > In <12. List utilities>, please change the name of forall to for- 
> > all.  This is consistent with for-each, and "forall" is not an  
> > English word in any case.
> 
> +1 (or better yet go with the SRFI-1 versions instead).

+1
-- 
Trent Buck, Student Errant