Re: [Scheme-reports] Proposed compromise on #68 "unspecified value(s)" John Cowan (08 Sep 2011 21:01 UTC)

Re: [Scheme-reports] Proposed compromise on #68 "unspecified value(s)" John Cowan 08 Sep 2011 21:00 UTC

Bill Schottstaedt scripsit:

> > No Scheme uses option B.
>
> s7 does.

I meant "No Scheme on my list", but I have added s7 now, and it
does what you say:

$ s7

> (cons (values 1 2))
(1 . 2)
> (values 1 2)

;write port argument 2, 2, is an integer but should be an output port
;  line 1
;    (write (values 1 2))

--
John Cowan   http://ccil.org/~cowan  cowan@ccil.org
[P]olice in many lands are now complaining that local arrestees are insisting
on having their Miranda rights read to them, just like perps in American TV
cop shows.  When it's explained to them that they are in a different country,
where those rights do not exist, they become outraged.  --Neal Stephenson

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