Baby-Doe and friends

[will@cs.uoregon.edu]

I like the names RECEIVE-VALUES and VALUES.  In response to Norman
Adams's question, I expect to call them directly instead of using
syntactic sugar.  That's why I want the thunk to be the first
argument and the receiver the second, and that's why I don't like
the CALL-WITH-XXX names, which (sound like they) imply that the
receiver is the first argument.

We could do worse than ARGUMENTS and VALUES.  While reading Guy's
message I though he was going to propose that Baby Doe be called
BOUNCES.

Peace, Will