Re: [Scheme-reports] bodies in case and cond clauses John Cowan (19 May 2011 17:49 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] bodies in case and cond clauses Andy Wingo (19 May 2011 21:33 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] bodies in case and cond clauses Aaron W. Hsu (20 May 2011 02:24 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] bodies in case and cond clauses John Cowan (20 May 2011 02:31 UTC)

Re: [Scheme-reports] bodies in case and cond clauses John Cowan 19 May 2011 17:48 UTC

Andy Wingo scripsit:
> Suggestion: make the clauses in `case' and `cond' forms (without =>,
> naturally) be BODY instances, to allow them to have definitions.  It is
> well defined AFAIK, and costs nothing.

Ticket filed.  I'm against this one, though, because of the bizarre
appearance of (cond ((pred1) (define ...) (e1)) ...).  Internal definitions
always come first everywhere else in Scheme except at the top level and
top-level BEGINs.

--
Income tax, if I may be pardoned for saying so,         John Cowan
is a tax on income.  --Lord Macnaghten (1901)           cowan@ccil.org

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