Andre van Tonder scripsit: > I would actually support outlawing mutiple returns to > all definitions, including internal definitions, for the > following reasons: > > - I suspect that it may make certain optimizations > (such as detecting possibilities for inlining or direct > substitution) more difficult. It is no longer sufficient > to detect set! statements to determine mutability. > Mutability detection becomes undecidable. > > - Overloading the meaning of DEFINE to effect mutations > is unnecessary and just feels like an abuse to me. > The intention of mutation does not get clearly expressed.
I very strongly support this. -- As you read this, I don't want you to feel John Cowan sorry for me, because, I believe everyone [EMAIL PROTECTED] will die someday. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan --From a Nigerian-type scam spam _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
