[Scheme-reports] multiple returns from map functions? Andy Wingo (05 May 2011 15:13 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] multiple returns from map functions? Aaron W. Hsu (05 May 2011 15:31 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] multiple returns from map functions? xacc.ide@gmail.com (05 May 2011 15:49 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] multiple returns from map functions? Andy Wingo (05 May 2011 18:13 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] multiple returns from map functions? Aaron W. Hsu (05 May 2011 17:40 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] multiple returns from map functions? Aaron W. Hsu (05 May 2011 19:19 UTC)

Re: [Scheme-reports] multiple returns from map functions? Andy Wingo 05 May 2011 18:12 UTC

On Thu 05 May 2011 18:08, Jim Rees <jimreesma@gmail.com> writes:

>     Should the following be valid?
>
>     (map cons #0=(a b c . #0#) '(1 2 3 4 5))
>      => ((a 1) (b 2) (c 3) (a 4) (b 5))
>
> (list? '#0=(a b c . #0#)) ==> #f
>
> ..and I'm pretty sure map requires lists.

SRFI-1 map simply requires that one of the lists be finite, and R7RS
specifies that the result will have the length of the shortest list, so
there would be no ambiguity.

(Just arguing here; I don't know what's right.)

Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/

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