"Jörg F. Wittenberger" scripsit: > IMHO there should be no undefined *value* as such. It should be > just undefined what's being returned. If - for some reason - some > fake value need to be there to satisfy some other condition, so be > it. But Scheme would IMHO be better off along the default Racket > way.
See <http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/wiki/OneArmedIf> for details on how different Schemes do it. There is a fairly strong consensus to return an "undefined-value value", but no Scheme standard prescribes such an object. -- Evolutionary psychology is the theory John Cowan that men are nothing but horn-dogs, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan and that women only want them for their money. co...@ccil.org --Susan McCarthy (adapted) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation. Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and game-changing conversations that shape the rapidly evolving mobile landscape. Sign up now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63431311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Readable-discuss mailing list Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
