[r6rs-discuss] Standard Libraries: small editorial improvements

Sven.Hartrumpf at FernUni-Hagen.de Sven.Hartrumpf at FernUni-Hagen.de
Fri Jan 26 06:45:43 EST 2007


Some small things:

1. The exceptions in section 14 should be ordered, for example by chapter.

2. Section 4 talks about "O(...) calls to the predicate". Before "proc"
was only referred to as a "procedure". Even clearer could be the following:
"O(...) calls to proc"

3. "construction procedure" in section 5.2: In most other places, this
is called a "constructor".

4. "(record rtd p3-1)" in section 5.2. record-rtd is unknown at this point.
It will be defined in section 5.4.

5. Example on p. 16. The meaning of r? and make-r can only be guessed.
Proposal: extend the define-record-type expression.

6. p. 19: "(record? obj)
Returns #t if obj is a record, and its record type is not opaque.
Returns #f otherwise."
The comma is indicating an unwanted grouping.
The preceding paragraph sounds like a contadiction to this definition
because I conclude from the preceding paragraph that the inspection of a
standard type implemented as an opaque record type _is_ possible. At least,
the preceding paragraph could be improved.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.r6rs.org/pipermail/r6rs-discuss/attachments/20070126/989f43b4/attachment-0001.pgp


More information about the r6rs-discuss mailing list