Re: unspecified-object

[Brad Pierce <pierce@locus.ucla.edu>]

In article <8905241845.AA02829@zohar> jar@zurich.ai.mit.edu writes:

>It doesn't make sense to specify that the object to be returned should
>be unspecified.  It seems to me that if some specific object is to be
>specified, then it should be a specific object, not an unspecific one.
>Besides, if we specify what object should be returned, then that
>object will no longer be unspecified.

When a procedure is applied to valid input and the result is unspecified,
valuable information is lost.  I am suggesting removing the possibility of
leaving unspecified the result of valid procedure applications. I am also
suggesting that there be a special object which represents the important
information which is currently discarded. Practical benefits aside, I 
simply find it aesthetically unpleasant to pass around values which have no
information content, when an alternative approach is possible.

-- Brad