On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, John Cowan wrote:
Elf scripsit:
i take the number of srfi's relating to binding (values ...) clauses in
different ways as evidence of its confusing and unnecessary nature. :)
Whereas I think of TMTOWTDI as one of Scheme's virtues. Anyhow, we've
i would agree, on the whole. however, this much duplication for exactly
identical attempted functionality is a bit odd.
come a long way from being required to use call-values. It also occurs
to me that rec and let-values and all need not expand into call-values --
that's just the *portable* expansion of them.
they'll all be call-with-values on the inside, or the equivalent thereof.
receive is call-with-values without the keyword 'lambda':
(receive (vars ...) generator consumer) ->
call-with-values (lambda () generator) (lambda (vars...) consumer))
let-values, same thing. theyre all just different ways of deleting the
word lambda from call-with-values but retaining the rest of the structure
in random orders (hence my ongoing confusion). how would one implement
this efficiently without using call-with-values?
-elf
_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
Chicken-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
