[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: On optional arguments

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 67 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 67 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

bear wrote:
For what it's worth, I do not believe that optional arguments
should ever be at the beginning in a scheme function call.
That's one of the things that the language doesn't naturally
do, and having it happen for one or a few functions creates
glaring exceptions that have to be memorized.

As far as I can tell, "the language" doesn't naturally do optional arguments very well at all. R5RS has no facilities for it except taking apart a list, and the difference between handling optional arguments at the end rather than at the beginning is minor.
	--Per Bothner
per@xxxxxxxxxxx   http://per.bothner.com/