[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SRFI 31 procedure vs. named-lambda (2)
Al Petrofsky writes:
> but it's twenty years too late to make such a change to the very
> heart of scheme.
Please note that I was not suggesting to change any of the established
notation. And your point of view seems to me a little bit like saying,
well, there have been unfortunate decisions in the past, we cannot
change these and therefore our new decisions must be similarly
> I don't think we've agreed on functionality.
> I thus find rec to be a good fit with the system.
Well, given the history of Scheme I agree with your proposal. I will
try to set up a new version of the document.