From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marius Vollmer Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: let-values, and-let* no variables Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:28:49 +0200 Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87isbea99y.fsf@zip.com.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1092998743 31499 80.91.224.253 (20 Aug 2004 10:45:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:45:43 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 20 12:45:33 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1By6to-0004lz-00 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:45:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1By6y6-0007KP-Qe for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:49:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1By6xa-00076T-6x for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:49:26 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1By6xY-000765-62 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:49:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1By6xX-00075v-Om for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:49:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.41.8] (helo=mx20.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1By6t8-0001V6-6h for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:44:50 -0400 Original-Received: from [129.217.163.1] (helo=mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1By6di-0007oK-A0 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:28:54 -0400 Original-Received: from troy.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (troy.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.163.17]) by mail.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B062C39FE6 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:28:50 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by troy.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de (Postfix, from userid 520) id 09BE0B99E; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:28:49 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: guile-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87isbea99y.fsf@zip.com.au> (Kevin Ryde's message of "Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:27:37 +1000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:3993 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:3993 Kevin Ryde writes: > I'm contemplating the way "begin" is used for the body of let-values > and and-let* with no bindings. It has the unhappy effect of allowing > what is visually an internal define to go out into the containing > environment, eg. Uhh, intuitively I'd say that this is wrong behavior. Maybe you should ask on comp.lang.scheme. > I guess nobody would write an empty and-let* or let-values > deliberately, but it could arise out of a macro. I'm thinking to put > some words of caution in the manual, to make it clear the body isn't > the same as a plain "let" or "let*". That would be good, even if we 'fix' our implementation to behave differently. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel