Am Sa., 22. Okt. 2022 um 14:19 Uhr schrieb Marc Feeley
<xxxxxx@iro.umontreal.ca>:
>
>
> > On Oct 22, 2022, at 7:38 AM, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Wow! That's an excellent idea for a name! I would like to adapt it.
>
> While “independently” is a much better name than “perform”, I think it is still not quite right.  If the evaluations are truly independent then they could be evaluated in parallel (at least in some interpretation of “independent”).  Why not simply call it “out-of-order”?

I think I still prefer "independently" as the "independent" aspect is
more important than the time-ordering aspect.  All names are only
approximations and I think that the approximation given by
"independently" is close enough. But I may be persuaded if there are
strong opinions favoring "out-of-order" or something like that.

> By the way, why is this defined as syntax and not as a procedure?  I would expect these to be equivalent due to the out-of-order evaluation of arguments in a procedure call:
>
>     (out-of-order A B C D E) = ((lambda rest (values)) A B C D E)
>
> So you could
>
> (define (out-of-order . rest) (values))

Each expression can evaluate to zero or more than one value.  An
expression standing for a procedure argument must evaluate to exactly
one value.