|
either-guard reference implementation
Shiro Kawai
(16 Jul 2020 02:15 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(16 Jul 2020 04:28 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(16 Jul 2020 04:42 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(16 Jul 2020 05:01 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(16 Jul 2020 15:12 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(16 Jul 2020 17:24 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(16 Jul 2020 17:45 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(16 Jul 2020 18:04 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(16 Jul 2020 18:07 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(16 Jul 2020 18:29 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(16 Jul 2020 23:31 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(17 Jul 2020 00:10 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Arthur A. Gleckler
(17 Jul 2020 03:15 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(17 Jul 2020 04:27 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Arthur A. Gleckler
(17 Jul 2020 05:00 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(17 Jul 2020 05:55 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(17 Jul 2020 05:55 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Shiro Kawai
(17 Jul 2020 07:35 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(17 Jul 2020 13:40 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(17 Jul 2020 13:50 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Arthur A. Gleckler
(18 Jul 2020 05:22 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(18 Jul 2020 12:32 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(29 Jul 2020 23:18 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(31 Jul 2020 08:36 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(05 Aug 2020 06:07 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(05 Aug 2020 06:22 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(05 Aug 2020 06:28 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(05 Aug 2020 06:48 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(07 Aug 2020 22:08 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(09 Aug 2020 11:14 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(09 Aug 2020 13:10 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(11 Aug 2020 08:14 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(11 Aug 2020 16:48 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(15 Aug 2020 12:11 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
John Cowan
(15 Aug 2020 13:57 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (16 Jul 2020 20:40 UTC)
|
|
Re: either-guard reference implementation
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(16 Jul 2020 23:25 UTC)
|
Am Do., 16. Juli 2020 um 20:14 Uhr schrieb John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org>: > > I think they should reject empty bodies. What's the point of going through all that binding and then just returning something useless. If the and-let* body of SRFI 2 is empty, the value of the form is the value of the last claw, which makes perfect sense. This has an obvious generalization to SRFI 189's maybe-let*. > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 2:04 PM Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe <xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz> wrote: >> >> On 2020-07-16 13:45 -0400, John Cowan wrote: >> > > If this is what is expected, I think the SRFI >> > > should indicate that "<body> is a sequence of zero or more definitions >> > > followed by one or more expressions". >> > >> > My point is that people familiar with Scheme specifications will already >> > know that. It's not actually defined in one place in R[57]RS, but it >> > appears repeatedly in the definitions of let, let*, etc. So I think people >> > will not be surprised if either-guard fails because they have not provided >> > at least one expression. >> >> I had the very same thought. Then the sample implementation of >> either-guard behaves as expected. >> >> On the other hand, the -let*(-values) forms accept empty bodies >> (as an artifact of their origin in SRFI 2); in this case, they return >> a Just / Right of an unspecified value. If it seems important enough, >> I'll change the implementation of these forms to reject empty bodies. >> >> -- >> Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe <xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz> >> >> "The composer makes plans, music laughs." --Morton Feldman
