Mikael Tillenius scripsit: > However in my opinion the following example is bad style: > > > > > >Another use case: > > > > (define (fun) > > (define var1 ...) > > ... do some calculations or whatever ... > > (define var2 depending-on-those-calculations) > > ...rest...)
I, on the other hand, hold it to be good style not to introduce new names until necessary (in any programming language); and using defines in this fashion reduces the amount of nesting required, thus adding to expressiveness. I am not alone in this view: the more recently devised members of the Algol family of programming languages, namely C++, Java, and C#, all allow this style of mid-block declaration. Scheme too belongs to this family (despite its lexical syntax), and I see no reason why it should not acquire this facility as well. I note that Chicken and scsh already support this style. -- John Cowan http://ccil.org/~cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 'Tis the Linux rebellion / Let coders take their place, The Linux-nationale / Shall Microsoft outpace, We can write better programs / Our CPUs won't stall, So raise the penguin banner of / The Linux-nationale. --Greg Baker _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
