[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] 4.2.2. binding constructs
On Thu 19 May 2011 19:18, John Cowan <cowan@x> writes:
>> Perhaps also there should be clarity
>> regarding the validity of the following program:
>> (let* ((x 1)
>> (x (+ x 1)))
> It's fairly silly, but not illegal.
Right, but the language for `let' says that all identifiers should be
distinct, and the language for `let*' simply says that it's like `let'
but in-order. Not a major point, and it could go unmentioned, but it is
Scheme-reports mailing list