AndrevanTonder wrote:
I do not personally like one-armed IF, but let me point out that AND/OR can also be used instead of WHEN/UNLESS. In fact, AND/OR can be more concise than WHEN/UNLESS when there is more than one condition. Having said that, using AND/OR this way does feel somewhat artificial in some cases, and I would in some cases rather use WHEN/UNLESS if it were standardized. In such a case, I would prefer it to be in the base library.
I like things like WHEN/UNLESS on the grounds that, though formally redundant, a little bit of syntactic variability like that /can/ make programs much easier to read.
At the same time, I wonder if the R6RS effort isn't fundamentally overburdened. On the one hand, there are hard issues to resolve about the core language. On the other hand, there's all this sentiment that R6RS should play the role of a kind of Common Scheme (analogous to Common Lisp).
As a wildcard: perhaps it would be better to have a more narrowly focused R6 at one end, SRFIs at the other end, and in between a new committee whose role is to, in some sense, elevate the best libraries and extensions-beyond-core in a way that the SRFI process can not.
-t
_______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
