On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 10:48:44PM -0700, Ray Dillinger wrote: > As I said, the symmetry breaks down in the syntax of the language > we use to represent it. > > I am still not convinced that multiple returns are a "Right thing" > in scheme myself, nor that call-with-values et al are the best way > to express it. > > I am convinced of the clarity and symmetry of the "argument tuples > and return tuples" mathematics, but I find myself with a vague > feeling that there is something deeply wrong with the way they've > been mapped to the scheme language.
Syntax is the problem, to be sure. Forth has no issues with multiple return values, for instance. No function syntax to speak of. I'm in favour of multiple return values, fwiw. Programming isn't maths, it's composition of computation. (But the mathiness of scheme is definitely a plus...) Multiple return values help with code factoring and clarity of algorithm expression. I don't know that call-with-values is necessarily the best syntax, though. I mostly use let-values or compose. Cheers, -- Andrew _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
