[R6RS] Request for vote: Syntax for multiple values

Michael Sperber sperber
Fri Dec 23 02:39:15 EST 2005

"Manuel Serrano" <Manuel.Serrano at sophia.inria.fr> writes:

>> >> <binding spec> -> (<binding lhs> <expression>)
>> >> <binding lhs> -> <variable>
>> >>                | (<variable>*)
>> > Why "*" and not "+"? Do we really want to allow expressions such as:
>> >
>> >   (let ((() expr)) ...)
>> Yes.
> Why?

I guess they're less useful for LET and LETREC.  However with LET* and
LETREC*, I sometimes want to intersperse side-effecting expressions
with regular bindings.  Those expressions will often have (especially
with the change we've made to the semantics of BEGIN) zero return

Generally, making <binding lhs> as close as possible to <formals> is
just POLA.

Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla

More information about the R6RS mailing list