David A. Wheeler scripsit: > I like this idea. In a few places this patch changes return values > to intentionally return (values)... which is also okay by me.
For the record, I've never been a fan of returning zero values when you have nothing in particular to return. R6RS and R7RS authorize returning multiple values where the continuation ignores the values, but R5RS does not, and indeed SCM, SigScheme, Shoe, and Owl Lisp do not permit it: they throw errors to `(begin (values) 3)` and `(begin (values 1 2) 3)`, rather than returning 3 as other R5RS systems do. In my own code, I always return the value of `(if #f #f)`, which is typically a Scheme's undefined-value value. But I can live with it. -- Her he asked if O'Hare Doctor tidings sent from far John Cowan coast and she with grameful sigh him answered that http://ccil.org/~cowan O'Hare Doctor in heaven was. Sad was the man that word co...@ccil.org to hear that him so heavied in bowels ruthful. All she there told him, ruing death for friend so young, James Joyce, Ulysses algate sore unwilling God's rightwiseness to withsay. "Oxen of the Sun" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server. Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Readable-discuss mailing list Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
