[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-hackers] extending define-values

From: Alex Shinn
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] extending define-values
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 09:40:02 +0900

On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Felix <address@hidden> wrote:
From: Alex Shinn <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] extending define-values
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 12:39:43 +0900

> On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Peter Bex <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 10:49:15PM +0200, Felix wrote:
>> > The patch looks ok to me, even though I'm not sure the benefit of having
>> > this feature outweights the added complexity, apart from having a little
>> > bit of extra consistence.
>> Note that this makes define-values r7rs-compliant.
>> The alternative is to keep the old definition and provide the slightly
>> more complicated one in the new "r7rs egg", but I don't know how to make
>> the internal definitions syntax stuff extensible.
> If you wanted to go this route you could just grab the portable
> reference implementation of define-values, no need to touch
> internals.

This wouldn't work for internal definitions, I think. Is "define-values"
allowed for local definitions in R7RS?

It's just syntax which expands into internal definitions.
The only way it could not work is with an implementation
which looks for internal defines statically before expanding
the lambda body.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]