[r6rs-discuss] Shouldn't it be (rrs)?

From: Abdulaziz Ghuloum <aghuloum>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 13:37:44 -0400

On May 24, 2007, at 10:01 AM, AndrevanTonder wrote:

> In any case, shouldn't it be
>
> (rrs)
> (rrs (6))
> (rrs base)
>
> and so on? The current (rnrs (6)) sounds, to me, like
>
> "The sixth version of the n-th report",
>
> which is a bit nonsensical.

If you think (rnrs (6)) sounds nonsensical, try reading
(rnrs r5rs (6)).

Aziz,,,
Received on Thu May 24 2007 - 13:37:44 UTC