[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Scheme-reports] values [was: Opinion about R7RS]

Jussi Piitulainen <jpiitula@x> wrote:

> (...)
>>     The "values" function should be defined better about the equivalence:
>>        (values X) == X
> (...)
> The real definition is "passes its arguments to its continuation".

    Thanks for this clarification (and sorry for answering late, I was  
far from any computer for 3 days).

>> A rough implementation of this function is:
>> (define (values . things)
>>    (lambda (f) (apply f things)))

    For me, the problem was that I suspect some interpreters to use  
such a rough implementation. MIT Scheme, for example. But may be they  
are not fully R(5|6)RS-compliant and they should signal that within  
their documentation.



This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Scheme-reports mailing list