[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Scheme Digest #125
Date: 27 May 89 01:47:09 GMT
From: Robert Steven Glickstein <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Excerpts from ext.nn.comp.lang.scheme: 25-May-89 Scheme Digest #125
> Jonathan Shapiro@POLYA.S (631)
> Very well. I hereby specify an object whose name is
I second the motion. I am currently designing ELSIE (the "Embedded Lisp
[Scheme] Interpreter, `ELSIE'"), and I'd rather not have to make
arbitrary decisions about what SET! returns (for instance). (Actually,
set! is a bad example, since I believe it should return the new value,
which I guess I'm proposing for R4RS, but you get the idea.)
Since the return value is left unspecified, you don't have to make an arbitrary
decision. Simply created #UNSPECIFIED in your implementations and return it.
This is completely consistent with the current standard. Just don't force
#UNSPECIFIED on the rest of our implementations.