[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] 6.4 control features: -map and -for-each procedures
10 minutes ago, John Cowan wrote:
> Andy Wingo scripsit:
> > Also, what is the motivation for having multi-arg `map' terminate
> > at the first empty list?
> Compatibility with the widely accepted SRFI 1.
Yesterday, John Cowan wrote:
| You are mistaken. The only thing the WG1 charter (our constitution; we
| didn't choose it) has to say about R6RS is this:
| Insofar as practical, the language should be backwards compatible
| with the IEEE standard, the R5RS standard, and an appropriate
| subset of the R6RS standard.
| Note the significant ordering of the terms. When R6RS differs from
| R5RS, we need a justification to adopt R6RS, not vice versa.
| Similar wording appears in the WG2 charter.
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
Scheme-reports mailing list