let-values* generates Unbound variable

let-values* generates Unbound variable

[Judy Hawkins]

let-values* is mentioned in the documentation for SRFI-11, but


guile> (version)
"1.8.5"
guile> (use-modules (srfi srfi-11))
guile> (let-values* (((x y) (values 1 2))) (list x y))

Backtrace:
In standard input:
   3: 0* (let-values* (((x y) (values 1 2))) (list x y))

standard input:3:1: In expression (let-values* (#) (list x y)):
standard input:3:1: Unbound variable: let-values*
ABORT: (unbound-variable)

so I don't know if this is a documentation bug or a code bug, but I sure would find let-values* a handy thing.

Judy Hawkins





      

Re: let-values* generates Unbound variable

[Judy Hawkins]

> Unbound variable: let-values*

So, in answer to my own question, it appears that my previous post is reporting a documentation bug, as using the spelling let*-values works just dandy:

guile> (let*-values (((x y) (values 1 2)) ((n m) (values (+ x x) (+ y y)))) (list n m))
(2 4)


In the reference manual for 1.8.5, searching on let-values gets me the following:


*(srfi srfi-11)*
     Multiple-value handling with `let-values' and `let-values*' (*note
     SRFI-11::).

----------- and in ------------------------------------------------

File: guile.info,  Node: SRFI-11,  Next: SRFI-13,  Prev: SRFI-10,  Up: SRFI Sup\
port

6.4.10 SRFI-11 - let-values
---------------------------

-------------- the last line reads -----------------------------

 `let-values*', on the other hand, performs the
bindings sequentially, just like `let*' does for single-valued
expressions.

---------------------------------------------------------------

(On doing one more search on let-values the net I turned up a page at  http://docs.plt-scheme.org that put me on to trying the let*-values spelling which solves my immediate problem.)

Judy Hawkins





      

Re: let-values* generates Unbound variable

[Neil Jerram]

Judy Hawkins <jlharkins@yahoo.com> writes:

>> Unbound variable: let-values*
>
> So, in answer to my own question, it appears that my previous post is
> reporting a documentation bug, as using the spelling let*-values works
> just dandy:

Thanks for reporting and looking into this.  In the latest (1.8.7)
release this is almost already fixed; there's just the menu item still
saying let-values*.  I'll fix that soon.

Regards,
        Neil