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

Re: RECEIVE vs. LET-VALUES

To: sperber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor])
Subject: Re: RECEIVE vs. LET-VALUES
From: Lars Thomas Hansen <lth@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 10:26:23 -0400
Cc: Lars Thomas Hansen <lth@xxxxxxxxxxx>, stone@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, srfi-8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: Your message of "03 Jul 1999 16:10:16 +0200." <y9ld7y9kenr.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

>Why not turn LET-VALUES into a separate SRFI?  Both forms are in
>fairly widespread use.  How about it, Lars?

That's a fair suggestion, especially if RECEIVE is already seeing use in
existing systems.  (I wasn't aware of that.)

--lars

Follow-Ups:
- Re: RECEIVE vs. LET-VALUES
  - From: Matthias Felleisen

References:
- Re: RECEIVE vs. LET-VALUES
  - From: Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor]

Prev by Date: Re: RECEIVE vs. LET-VALUES
Next by Date: Re: RECEIVE vs. LET-VALUES
Previous by thread: Re: RECEIVE vs. LET-VALUES
Next by thread: Re: RECEIVE vs. LET-VALUES
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread