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

Re: what about dropping rest-lists?

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 71 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 71 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

Neil W. Van Dyke wrote:
> The "values" keyword as a kludge to support rest-lists, however, strikes
> me as a syntactically ugly way to support an operation that I'd expect
> to use only rarely.

Same with me, but the expected ugliness will be low:

        E{ugliness} = Sum[ugliness(case) * Prob{case} : case].

And if you really need the rest-list thing (the day will come),
the meaning will at least be obvious.

> In summary, I'd really like to see "let", "let*", "letrec", and
> "letrec*" extended for multiple-value, but would like to drop the
> "(value ...)" syntax, even if that means dropping rest-list support.

At the point I decide to drop rest-list values the SRFI will be withdrawn, I promise.
The whole point of this SRFI is to integrate multiple values in all their beauty
smoothly into the Scheme language.