Re: [Scheme-reports] [r6rs-discuss] redefining eqv?

[John Cowan <cowan@x>]

Adrien "Pied" Piérard scripsit:

> Now that I think about it, I think that I almost never use CASE with
> something else than symbols and numbers.

Characters work too.  CASE can only work well with something that has
a datum syntax and for which EQV? produces the right result.

> And the more I think about it (that, is, not a lot though), the more I
> think that CASE is quite useless, as it could be implemented I guess
> straightforwardly in terms of COND.

The same is true of COND, which can be implemented in terms of IF.  That
is why R5RS separates the descriptions of derived and primitive syntax.

-- 
John Cowan      cowan@x         http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Statistics don't help a great deal in making important decisions.
Most people have more than the average number of feet, but I'm not about
to start a company selling shoes in threes. --Ross Gardler

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