Re: [Scheme-reports] Formal Response #382: Allow "if" to accept arbitrarily many if-then pairs

[John Cowan <cowan@x>]

Aaron W. Hsu scripsit:

> Notice that you only need the explicit FOR when you are dealing with  
> explicit phasing systems like Racket. On systems like Chez or  
> Vicare/Ikarus, you should be able to just specify the (extended-if)  
> library and have things work.

A fine example of why R6RS-style explicit phasing (where you can specify
what phases an identifier is defined at, but cannot define it differently
at different phases) makes little sense, as distinct from Racket-style
fully isolated phasing.

-- 
John Cowan   http://ccil.org/~cowan    cowan@x
We want more school houses and less jails; more books and less arsenals;
more learning and less vice; more constant work and less crime; more
leisure and less greed; more justice and less revenge; in fact, more of
the opportunities to cultivate our better natures.  --Samuel Gompers

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