Re: Introspection Marc Nieper-WiÃkirchen 04 Jun 2020 16:39 UTC
Am Di., 12. Mai 2020 um 20:46 Uhr schrieb Lassi Kortela <firstname.lastname@example.org>: > Is it not good enough to re-use the `->` arrow we already have? Syntax > ought to be needed mainly for multiple values and for places > (generalized `set!`). Other conversions can be procedures. And even the > syntax looks like a procedure call, so it's interchangeable except for > not being first-class. I don't like the "values-> ..." convention. That it has to be syntax is a minor thing. The problem is that we use "... -> ..." when mapping objects of one type to objects of another type. However, there is such a thing as a "values" type. Assuming this leads to all the confusion we have had on the mailing list of SRFI 189 and also here, I think.