[r6rs-discuss] peculiar semantics for a predicate

[William D Clinger]

Bear wrote:
> >I doubt whether this was the intended semantics, but
> >those of us who take R6RS conformance seriously will
> >implement it faithfully.
> 
> That is ... sad.  I would not choose to make a dialect
> *less* useful, in an obvious way, in order to conform
> to what is clearly an error in the standard.

Not to worry, Bear.  So far as I can tell, no one is taking
R6RS conformance seriously.

I certainly don't.  On Larceny's main wiki page concerning
conformance, the very first of the bullet items that list
sources of non-conformance says "Larceny does not conform
to known errors in the R6RS." [1]

Will

[1] http://larceny.ccs.neu.edu/larceny-trac/wiki/ConformanceModes