Re: false

[R. Kent Dybvig <dyb@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>]

I agree with Will that we should make the falseness of () unspecified,
if we can't do better.

But why don't we go all the way on this one, and require that () be
distinct from #f and that only #t and #f be treated as booleans in
conditional expressions?  Yes, it would affect a lot of code and a few
books, but only a fraction of what is yet to be written, unless we are
are wasting our time.  It is a shame we didn't do it right a long time
ago.  Surely it would have been less painful three years ago than now,
and surely it will be less painful now than in another three years.

If we can't agree that it is a good idea to treat only #t and #f as
boolean values, then maybe we can agree that it is a good idea to
require that () be distinct from #f.