Alex Shinn scripsit: > Using letrec as though it were letrec* is indeed a bug. Specifically, > it "is an error", which means implementations are free to handle this > situation however they want, including raising an exception or simply > treating it as letrec*.
Yes, that's true (though not true in R6RS, where sequential dependency in letrec must signal an error). Besides the R6RS implementations, only MIT, Scheme48/scsh, SigScheme, and TinyScheme do not handle letrec as letrec*, though SISC prints a warning. Only Scheme48/scsh and SigScheme get upset by sequential dependencies in internal defines (following R5RS strictly). -- I don't know half of you half as well John Cowan as I should like, and I like less than half [email protected] of you half as well as you deserve. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan --Bilbo _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
