Re: SRFI 61: a more general `cond' clause

[Stephen Compall]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 10:00 +1000, Kevin Ryde wrote:
> I think you should decide now if applications need to use that module
> or not.  If not then may as well describe the full syntax with the
> main `cond' docs.

I went with the "not" route.  As I previously wrote, code that breaks on
this would be very odd indeed.

> > +;;; srfi-6.scm --- Basic String Ports
> 
> Too much cut and paste :-)

I got lazy :)

Attached is a version with the suggested doc move and no more
srfi-61.scm.  Thanks for your recommendations.

Here's a new ChangeLog set, for ice-9/, doc/ref/, and libguile/
respectively:

2005-08-01  Stephen Compall  <address@hidden>

        * boot-9.scm (%cond-expand-features): Add srfi-61.

2005-08-01  Stephen Compall  <address@hidden>

        * api-control.texi (if cond case): Describe SRFI 61 cond.

        * srfi-modules.texi (SRFI-61): New section.
        (SRFI Support): Add SRFI-61 to menu.

2005-08-01  Stephen Compall  <address@hidden>

        * eval.c (scm_m_cond): Recognize SRFI 61 cond syntax.
        (CEVAL): Evaluate SRFI 61 cond clauses.

-- 
Stephen Compall

srfi-61-4s11.patch
Description: Text Data

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part