Re: [Scheme-reports] "unspecified values"

["Aaron W. Hsu" <arcfide@x>]

On Fri, 20 May 2011 12:02:04 -0400, Per Bothner <per@x> wrote:

>
> But there is an elegance to doing it this way: If the REPL prints out all
> the values of multiple values, then doing nothing when there are no  
> values
> doesn't even require special casing.

Indeed, I see no reason why an implementation should not be able to return  
no values when there are no "useful" values to consider, and R6RS moved  
*away* from overspecifying this to allow implementation to return as many  
different values as they felt like doing. I've mentioned before that this  
seems to be a much better thing than to force a single value.

However, the votes came in and R5RS' semantics won out.

	Aaron W. Hsu

-- 
Programming is just another word for the lost art of thinking.

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports