[R6RS] Convenient syntax for multiple values
Wed Jan 19 00:14:58 EST 2005
> Ah, OK, thanks. However, that's only if you use the dot notation,
> implying in your source code *that you want a list*. This case isn't
> covered by MULTIPLE-VALUE-LET/RECEIVE. For the cases these do cover,
> LET-VALUES generates equivalent code with no list allocation. Does
> this address your concern?
Yes, it does. My opposition only regards the introduction of the . notation
in the LET-VALUES form.
More information about the R6RS