Re: An alternate description of the multiple values proposal

[Pavel.pa@xerox.com]

I also don't see the call in Jinx's example as being in effect context.  I
think Chris is right about defining BEGIN in terms of CALL-WITH-VALUES.  Of
course, Chris and I disagree about the argument list of the consumer:

   (begin <action> <more>)  ->
   (call-with-values (lambda () <action>)
      (lambda ignored (begin <more>)))

It is interesting to note that the formal semantics gives a very different
translation of BEGIN:

   (begin <sequence>) -> ((lambda () <sequence>))