Exporting the canonical null value for pack/unpack
Vasilij Schneidermann
(20 Nov 2020 11:56 UTC)
|
Re: Exporting the canonical null value for pack/unpack
Amirouche Boubekki
(20 Nov 2020 16:20 UTC)
|
Re: Exporting the canonical null value for pack/unpack
John Cowan
(20 Nov 2020 16:22 UTC)
|
Re: Exporting the canonical null value for pack/unpack Vasilij Schneidermann (20 Nov 2020 16:33 UTC)
|
Re: Exporting the canonical null value for pack/unpack
Vasilij Schneidermann
(30 Nov 2020 11:29 UTC)
|
Re: Exporting the canonical null value for pack/unpack
Amirouche Boubekki
(30 Nov 2020 12:11 UTC)
|
Re: Exporting the canonical null value for pack/unpack
John Cowan
(30 Nov 2020 16:17 UTC)
|
Re: Exporting the canonical null value for pack/unpack
Amirouche Boubekki
(30 Nov 2020 16:19 UTC)
|
Re: Exporting the canonical null value for pack/unpack Vasilij Schneidermann 20 Nov 2020 16:33 UTC
> I think when an immutable object is exported from a library, it must > be done as a procedure like eof-object. > So in this case, the procedure `engine-null` seems to do the job? `engine-null` solves both the prefix issue and mirrors `eof-object`, so I'd go with that. > It can go either way: R6RS consistently uses a procedure, but since it is > an error (i.e. undefined behavior) to mutate an imported variable, it's > okay to just bind it with `define` and not bother with the procedure. True, but if it's less confusing to consistently use procedures throughout the SRFI, I don't see why not. Vasilij