1 |
summary: 'bound?' from (ice-9 optargs) has been removed but is useful. |
summary: 'bound?' from (ice-9 optargs) has been removed but is useful. |
2 |
reported: Steve Tell <tell@telltronics.org>, 2002-03-29 |
reported: Steve Tell <tell@telltronics.org>, 2002-03-29 |
3 |
affects: HEAD branch_release-1-6 |
affects: HEAD branch_release-1-6 |
4 |
fixed: Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.de>, 2002-02-22 |
proposed-fixed: Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.de>, 2002-02-22 |
5 |
|
|
6 |
mvo sez: |
mvo sez: |
7 |
|
|
47 |
> as something you shouldn't expect to stick around, and now it's going |
> as something you shouldn't expect to stick around, and now it's going |
48 |
> away. IMO, after we make sure we have an appropriate NEWS eulogy, we |
> away. IMO, after we make sure we have an appropriate NEWS eulogy, we |
49 |
> can forget about it. |
> can forget about it. |
50 |
|
|
51 |
|
2002-05-01 ttn sez: |
52 |
|
|
53 |
|
> i'm changing "fixed" header to "proposed-fixed" since it's not clear to me |
54 |
|
> that the bug is fixed at this time. probably we can find a way to provide |
55 |
|
> `bound?' and yet not use SCM_UNDEFINED. that would maintain continuation |
56 |
|
> and honor the spirit of the change that introduced the bug (encapsulation). |