***catonano_ is now known as catonano
<wingo>jcowan: is the intention that (scheme r5rs) also exports "else" (and a "cond" that assumes "else" is bound), even though "else" isn't specified as bound in r5rs? <wingo>(perhaps weinholt knows also) <jcowan>wingo: Yes, I'd say so. It is listed among the exports in Appendix A, along with => and ... <jcowan>I don't know of any Scheme implementation that lets you export unbound identifiers. <wingo>jcowan: fwiw it is listed in the base library but the r5rs library just specifies "whatever r5rs defines", which is ambiguous in this context i think <wingo>a strict reading would not include "else" <jcowan>App A: The (scheme r5rs) library provides the identifiers defined by R5RS, except that transcript-on and transcript-off are not present. Note that the exact and inexact procedures appear under their R5RS names inexact->exact and exact->inexact respectively. However, if an implementation does not provide a particular library such as the complex library, the corresponding identifiers will not appear in this library either. <jcowan>The word "defined" was perhaps il-chosen <jcowan>Note also that it does not say they have only R5RS semantics: `log` should probably accept two arguments. <wingo>and curiously that list does not include "else" <wingo>which implies that that "cond" implementation expects "else" to be unbound <jcowan>Okay, my bad. I was looking at R7RS-with-errata. Erratum 22 reads "22. In Appendix A, the (scheme r5rs) library should export syntax-rules, else, ..., => and _." <jcowan>Technically the errata are not _official_, in the sense that the Steering Committee has not met to ratify them, but I certainly recommend their use <wingo>jcowan: should there be a similar erratum for symbol=? <wingo>it should error when applied to non-symbols