10 minutes ago, Emmanuel Medernach wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Andre van Tonder <andre@het.brown.edu>wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 26 May 2011, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> >
> > > This is a question for WG1 (collectively):
> > >
> > > According to R5RS, is this code:
> > >
> > >  (call-with-values
> > >    (lambda ()
> > >      (call-with-current-continuation (lambda (k) (k 1 2 3))))
> > >    (lambda (x y z) 'ok))
> > >
> > > allowed to throw an error, or to return anything other than 'ok ?
> >
> > It is /not/ allowed to throw an error in R5RS.  According to R5RS:
> >
> >    Values might be defined as follows: [...]

It seems that some people take that "might" as open permission to
ignore that implementation.

> My personal opinion is that this is "historically" true : values are
> there to pass multiple arguments to continuations and let
> continuations catch all of them correctly (which is not possible
> otherwise)

I'm asking about the R5RS as is, and the WG1's colledctive
understanding of it.

Still waiting for an answer.  (I am specifically asking for WG1's
answer, not for personal opinions.)

--
          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!

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