Am Sa., 3. Sept. 2022 um 15:51 Uhr schrieb Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
<xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz>:
>
> Hi John, Arvydas, and the SRFI 235 list,
>
> Below are some comments and questions I have about the SRFI.  I've
> also attached a patch (against John's repo) which fixes some minor
> typos.
>
> 1. Can (complement proc) return #f if proc returns multiple values?

It would be better if an assertion violation (in R6RS terms) would be
raised, I think. It would be clearly a typing error.

(The only sensible alternative I see is if as many values are returned
as proc returns, but logically flipped.)

> 9. Major suggestion: Would it be reasonable for all of the
> syntax-like procedures to accept thunks *or* promises?  I believe
> this could be very useful, although the names might need tweaking.
>
> Delayed evaluation always gets short shrift in Scheme.  It would
> be a sad statement of the current situation for something called
> "lazy-and-procedure" to have nothing to do with delayed evaluation.

Promises do not form a disjoint type. Runtime-dispatch won't be
possible. Or what do you have in mind?

Marc