Am Di., 9. Juni 2020 um 19:31 Uhr schrieb Lassi Kortela <xxxxxx@lassi.io>:

> >>> (chain (floor/ 5 2)
> >>>          (- <2> <1>))
> >
> > It would be possible by replacing `<2>' with `(<> 2)'.
> >
> > But at least in this case, `(receive (x y) (floor/ 5 2) (- y x))' is
> > much clearer (and no new syntax for Scheme programmers).
>
> +1. We Schemers are already prone to obfuscating our code with "cadr"
> and "cdar" instead of giving clear names to the intermediate things :)

This is actually an argument for extending the let*(-values) form to
allow anonymous bindings because this would allow us to name some
intermediate results (where it helps code clarity) and to use others
implicitly. The standard let* forces us to name all variables; the
`->' form does not allow us to name any variable.