From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Keith Wright Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Problem with cond macro. Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 02:58:58 -0400 Sender: guile-user-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200204260658.g3Q6wwC01170@fcs9.free-comp-shop.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1019804631 9634 127.0.0.1 (26 Apr 2002 07:03:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 07:03:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 170zln-0002VC-00 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 09:03:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 170zl6-0000OS-00; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 03:03:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mx03.gis.net ([208.218.130.11] helo=gis.net) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 170zkr-0000Nk-00 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 03:02:53 -0400 Original-Received: from fcs9.free-comp-shop.com ([63.209.233.2]) by mx03.gis.net; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 03:02:51 -0400 Original-Received: (from kwright@localhost) by fcs9.free-comp-shop.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) id g3Q6wwC01170; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 02:58:58 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: fcs9.free-comp-shop.com: kwright set sender to kwright@gis.net using -f Original-To: dirk@ida.ing.tu-bs.de Errors-To: guile-user-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:319 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user:319 > From: Dirk Herrmann > Well, I'm not sure I understand all of this: What about the following: > > (define => #f) > (cond (#t => 'ok)) > > Should this also deliver 'ok ? It doesn't seem to with the current > implementation of syncase. A tricky question to be sure. I would say "Yes", but would listen quietly if Guy Steele had anything to say about it. It doesn't surprise me that syncase does not get it right, it was grafted on rather late in the game and still doesn't fit quite right. The => syntax in COND is a strange wart in Scheme and there is a strong temptation to handle it with special case code deep in the interpreter, rather than write code for the general case which has only one instance. Among the several bugs, misfeatures, and holes in Guile, I don't think this is one of the more important. -- -- Keith Wright Programmer in Chief, Free Computer Shop --- Food, Shelter, Source code. --- _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user