[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Multiple values for R4RS.
> Certainly not TECHNICALLY, but it is my POLITICAL feeling, that if it
> is not accepted as a complete package, it will not be accepted later.
> The people who want the "restrictive" multiple values will feel no
> pressure to accept it later since they will already have what they
> want. I'm not asking for their semantics to be different (I've
> compromised on paranoid checking by default), but I would like a
> little compromise on everyone else's part.
As long as we are considering the issues politically rather than
technically, how would you feel about the following compromises?
* let's add "values" and "with-values" (or "apply-values") and
change the name of the so-called "named let" to "recur".
* let's add "accepts?" and remove the requirement that Scheme
be case insensitive.
These may be considered together or separately, as you desire.