[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] [scheme-reports-wg1] Re: Proposed compromise on #68 "unspecified value(s)"
> No Scheme uses option B. In addition to the objections you raise,
> there is the fact that if cons is known to be bound to the usual value,
> "(cons (x))" can be rejected by a compiler under options A and C, but
> might be valid under option B.
>From what I understand, no legal syntax maybe be rejected by the
compiler. The error must always be raised at runtime.
Maybe another exercise is to test say (cons 1) and (/ 1 0) or anything
else where the compiler could make such assumptions across the various
Scheme-reports mailing list