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

Re: Comments on the Preliminary Report


I don't wonder that "named-lambda" is seldom used explicitly in
code.  The syntax is too clumsy.  What I'm looking for is a way
to add a name to any lambda expression, without changing the
expression fundamentally (like giving it a new name).  I think
people should be encouraged to name their functions in this
manner since it produces more robust, efficient, and readable

Named lambda isn't likely to be used much in mit-scheme anyway
because of the "(define (foo ...) ...)" syntax.  For those of
us who wish to see our lambdas explicit, named lambda is quite


If we don't have a generic length function, we should call the
function that returns the length of a list "list-length".  This
would be consistent with the names of other length functions and
leave the name length open for future genericization.

Case sensitivity:

I agree that having two different functions Length and length would
be confusing.  Why not make lexical identifier resolution case
insensitive but have a way to tell apart two symbols that differ only
in case?

	(let ((x 3)) X)                         => 3
	(eq 'x 'X)                              => #!false
	(eqv 'x 'X)				=> #!true
	(string->list (symbol->string 'X))      => (#\X)
	(string->List (symbol->string 'x))      => (#\x)