Brian Mastenbrook scripsit: > -> 1 in Scheme48, MIT and Gauche. It's an error in PLT (R5RS mode), > Larceny (R5RS mode), Gambit (hygienic mode), Chez 7.4d, SISC, and > Bigloo.
Guile, Chicken 4, and Chibi all puke on it too, but Kawa returns 1. > I believe that this approach is sensible. I don't agree. If that ought to work, why shouldn't (begin (define foo (bar)) (define (bar) 32)) work? Or for that matter (begin (define foo bar) (define bar 32))? The informal semantics of "begin" is that things are done in left-to-right order. If you want parallel evaluation, you know where to find it. > This only leaves open the question of how to treat `load'ed > files / R6RS-style top-level programs: as wrapped in an implicit > `begin', or a sequence of forms as if entered at the REPL? Still left open is the original question: is a library body a top-level implicit begin, or an internal implicit begin? -- Values of beeta will give rise to dom! John Cowan (5th/6th edition 'mv' said this if you tried http://www.ccil.org/~cowan to rename '.' or '..' entries; see [email protected] http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/odd.html) _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
