[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
why not "multiple-value-bind"??
SRFI-8 proposes:
(receive <formals> <expression> <body>)
as syntactic sugar for:
(call-with-values
(lambda () <expression> )
(lambda <formals> <body> ))
"Receive" seems kinda non-intuitive to me (like some sort of
networking thingy). Why not call it "multiple-value-bind" as in
Common Lisp <URL:http://www.harlequin.com/education/books/HyperSpec/
Body/mac_multiple-value-bind.html>, which has exactly the same
specification AFAICT (except for the usual differences between
Scheme & Common Lisp lambda formals):
(multiple-value-bind <formals> <expression> <body>)
Or if there's an adamant refusal to be the same as CL, what about
"with-values", perhaps?
-Rob
p.s. I actually find "let-values" more natural than "multiple-value-bind",
but MzScheme <URL:http://www.cs.rice.edu/CS/PLT/packages/doc/mzscheme/
node18.htm> already uses "let-values" with a somewhat different syntax
than proposed above:
(let-values ( ((variable ... ) <expression> )
... )
<body> )
Oh, well...
-----
Rob Warnock, 8L-855 rpw3@xxxxxxx
Applied Networking http://reality.sgi.com/rpw3/
Silicon Graphics, Inc. Phone: 650-933-1673
1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy. FAX: 650-933-0511
Mountain View, CA 94043 PP-ASEL-IA