[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
This seems like a useful feature, and I recall wondering myself why
RnRS "cond" had "=>" yet "case" did not.
I suspect the distinction involved reduced-sugar diet: getting the value
of a clause test within "cond" is very hard without "=>", but getting
the key of a "case" form without "=>" is easy.
Also, "cond"'s "=>" is a somewhat unfortunate kind of sugar, as some
syntax transformers that can produce "cond" forms have to specially
handle "=>" identifiers in their input syntax. Adding "=>" sugar to
"case" would similarly burden some syntax extensions that produce "case"
I'd like to be informed by the original wisdom for why "case" didn't
have a "=>" in the first place. Does anyone know the RnRS rationale?