[R6RS] Making continuations created by BEGIN accept multiple values

[Manuel Serrano]

> 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?
I would appreciate that because I don't get the point here :-)

-- 
Manuel