And us schemers would express it like this:<p>(cut take 5 (filter &lt;&gt; (drop 3 &lt;&gt;)))<p>or, without the cut macro:<p>(λ (pred list)
  (take 5 (filter pred (drop 3 list))))<p>And yes, in most schemes, you can use λ as a synonym for lambda. Sometimes you have to define it first, though. Anyways, that looks a lot like the Haskell to you, doesn&#x27;t it? It doesn&#x27;t have the laziness, but other than that...<p>Oh! Oh! I almost forgot! you can also use the thrush combinator, if you use the clojurian package:<p>(λ (list pred)
  (-&gt;&gt; list (drop 3) (filter pred) (take 5)))<p>And yes, I think this is all the ways you can do this in scheme. CHICKEN specifically. With some various macros packages.<p>Oh, wait! I forgot we have function composition, too, but you&#x27;d have to use lambda or cut constantly to make the thing work because we don&#x27;t have currying. So these are all the ELEGANT ways to make this in chicken scheme. With the cut SRFI. Or clojurian. And srfi-1, which is basically standard. and it&#x27;s better than the examples given, because pred and list aren&#x27;t pre-specified.