Compromise

[Jim Miller <jmiller%cs.brandeis.edu@RELAY.CS.NET>]

PLEASE, NO!!!  My understanding of the evolving discussion was that
named let was perceived by most participants as a binding construct,
and the proposed name does not reflect that.  I point out that the
Scheme community did NOT pick the name letrec (used in an argument
favoring "recur"); it was chosen by the mathematical logic/computer
theory community long before its introduction into Scheme and has a
very specific technical meaning of which the Scheme version is a
modified instance.  I, at least, agreed to that name because of its
accord with established mathematical convention.  I believe that
"recur" does NOT have such a justification and leads to the
misunderstanding that the form has something to do with recursion --
in the sense of process rather than procedure -- a perception that we
should NOT reinforce.

Sorry.

--Jim