Am 06.08.2011 23:52, schrieb John Cowan:
>> As the description of "force" discusses "delay" / "lazy" / "force" in
>> detail, it seems strange that it doesn't introduce the term "promise"
>> but refers to section 4.2.5 for that which, in turn, points to this
>> section for a detailed explanation. This should all be at one spot; I
>> propose to move everything there is to know about "delay" / "lazy" /
>> "force" to move to this section, and reduce the descriptions in 4.2.5
>> to be not much more than forward references.
>
> For better and worse, we are explicitly following the R5RS layout, and
> syntax is in Chapter 4, procedures in Chapter 6.  I have reworded the
> first sentence to read "Forces the value of a \var{promise} created by
> \ide{delay} or \ide{lazy}".

I was not arguing about the separation of syntax and procedures, but
about how the description of delay/lazy/force is distributed among them.
Ideally, the description in one chapter (preferrably chapter 4) is
minimal - not much more than a reference - and everything else described
in the other. Currently, they are important parts of the description in
both chapters which, regardless of where you start, requires you to jump
to the other chapter to get the full picture.

>> In the description for "raise-continuable", it should most probably
>> say "the equivalent to [...] raise", not "raise-continuable".
>
> No, it means what it says: the continuation of the call to the handler
> is the same as that of the call to raise-continuation.  I invite the
> proposal of better wording, though.

Ah, now I understand. I also don't know how to rephrase, though.

Regards,
Denis

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