This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 77 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 77 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
Concerning multiple values, whose only connection to this SRFI is that several procedures return multiple values, Aubrey Jaffer wrote: > If the system eschews them, what are the bounds of the system; are > libraries part of the system? System designers don't need my advice on where to draw the boundaries, but Marc was talking about implementors who might want to use the reference implementation as a basis for their implementation of R6RS arithmetic. In my opinion, arithmetic is an important part of any Scheme system. > Is it incumbent on platform-neutral > libraries to have multiple-value and non-multiple-value alternates? No. I was stating my intention with respect to the reference implementation for this SRFI only, to acknowledge Marc's point that multiple values perform poorly in some systems, and that the heavy use of multiple-value-returning procedures that would perform extremely well in some systems would not perform well at all in less performant systems. > What mechanism is there for library code to discover whether the > implementation running it has fast multiple-values? None. The reference implementation of R6RS arithmetic will be a starting point for implementors who wish to conform to R6RS arithmetic, not a library for users to use as an alternative to the native implementation of R6RS arithmetic. Will