[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Scheme-reports] "unspecified values"
- To: scheme-reports@x
- Subject: Re: [Scheme-reports] "unspecified values"
- From: Alaric Snell-Pym <alaric@x>
- Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 17:10:27 +0100
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com>
On 05/19/11 16:49, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Suggestion: replace every instance of "an unspecified value", "value is
> unspecified", "result is unspecified" and the like with "unspecified
> values". This would permit the elegant approach of defining control
> constructs with no logical value to return 0 values. This follows the
I was keen to do away with the strange dependence on precisely one value
that was not specified, but it was voted to stick with a single
undefined value being returned from things!
See #68 at http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/wiki/WG1Ballot2Results
Scheme-reports mailing list