From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: C++ declaration style programming? Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:06:24 -0500 Organization: What did you have in mind? A short, blunt, human pyramid? Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <20040121154109.SIFC267436.web02-imail.rogers.com@localhost> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1074701530 4604 80.91.224.253 (21 Jan 2004 16:12:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 16:12:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org, hanwen@cs.uu.nl Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 21 17:11:54 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AjKxN-0000ia-00 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 17:11:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AjKuN-0006vX-K0 for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:08:47 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AjKsn-0006oO-Fe for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:07:09 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AjKsA-0006QR-L8 for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:07:02 -0500 Original-Received: from [129.22.104.62] (helo=lewis.CNS.CWRU.Edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AjKs6-0006Py-6j for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:06:26 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.smtp-b.cwru.edu by smtp-b.cwru.edu (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.14 (built Mar 18 2003)) id <0HRU00501KMNP0@smtp-b.cwru.edu> for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:06:25 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from multivac.cwru.edu (multivac.ITS.CWRU.Edu [129.22.114.26]) by smtp-b.cwru.edu (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.14 (built Mar 18 2003)) with SMTP id <0HRU00234KQPAX@smtp-b.cwru.edu> for guile-user@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:06:25 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (qmail 13195 invoked by uid 500); Wed, 21 Jan 2004 16:06:47 +0000 In-reply-to: <20040121154109.SIFC267436.web02-imail.rogers.com@localhost> Original-To: Viktor Pavlenko Mail-followup-to: Viktor Pavlenko , hanwen@cs.uu.nl, guile-user@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: nobody User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) Original-Lines: 17 X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:2681 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.user:2681 Viktor Pavlenko wrote: > let* is a binding construct by definition and it is an error to > bind the same identifier twice (r5rs). Guile complains about duplicate bindings in let or letrec, but not let*; the second binding simply shadows the first. I believe that's what R5RS specifies. (So it is possible to accidentally shadow an existing binding, which may cause trouble in subsequent code similar to set!.) > Using side effects to re-bind a variable within the binding > expression of let* sounds like cheating :) There are other forms of side effects, like I/O. paul _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user