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

Re: Multiple values for R4RS

>> From: R. Kent Dybvig <dyb@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>
>> > From ramsdell@linus.mitre.org Thu Aug 31 07:35:26 1989
>> > Subject: Re: Multiple values for R4RS 
>> > 
>> > This confirms my hope that there is good chance we can reach agreement
>> > on the subject of multiple values for R4RS.  Let me point out that if
>> > agreement is reached soon enough, multiple values could be made part
>> > of IEEE Draft Standard for the Scheme Programming Language.
>> I don't see how.  We agreed at Snowbird not to make any significant
>> changes to R4RS via email that weren't preapproved at Snowbird, and we
>> specifically left multiple values as an issue to be decided at the next
>> meeting.  So multiple values must wait until R5RS or we must delay R4RS
>> until after we meet again.  Either way, multiple values won't make the
>> IEEE draft standard, right?

At the very least, we can prepare a proposal for the next meeting
which is agreeable to all reachable by E-mail.  It seems too bad no
action can be taken on a subject on which there seems to be near
agreement.  Is that what you really want?


PS.  In case my words are describing WITH-VALUES are confusing, here
is a formal description of my intended semantics.

%%% Raw TeX.
$$\hbox{\it with-values} = \hbox{\it twoarg }(\lambda \epsilon_1
\epsilon_2\kappa . \hbox{ \it applicate } \epsilon_1 \langle \rangle
\lambda \epsilon^\star . \hbox{ \it applicate } \epsilon_2
\epsilon^\star \kappa)$$