[R6RS] Making continuations created by BEGIN accept multiple values

[Michael Sperber]

This one was also on the list of issues.

I propose we do this because:

- every single Scheme implementation I've tried supports this
- many programs make use of this

I have a question on the issue: Some people at the workshop suggested
that, having this extension of R5RS, it might make sense to have forms
that don't have a natural return value (SET! for example) return zero
return values instead of some dummy "void" or "unspecific" value.
Kent commented "We killed that bird a long time ago."  Could some
elaborate what the issues are here?

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla