Am Fr., 9. Sept. 2022 um 21:54 Uhr schrieb John Cowan <[email protected]>:
> > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 5:25 AM Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> Am Do., 8. Sept. 2022 um 01:29 Uhr schrieb John Cowan <[email protected]>: >> >>> > >> Well, in that case, `string` could return a promise instead, turning it >>> into a non-strict procedure. >>> >> > "In principle, Minister." Scheme is very much a strict programming > language with a few lazy features. > I don't think that the answer is that clear. The idea of adding implicit forcing (or the general idea that all procedures accept promises besides ordinary value) to Scheme is to make programming non-strict algorithms easier (possibly as easy as programming strict algorithms). If this is the goal, turning even procedures like `string` into non-strict ones can make a lot of sense. This wouldn't touch the strict part of the language. I don't want to advocate this change to `string`; in fact, I don't advocate adding/allowing implicit forcing in a Scheme standard until enough practice and understanding have been gained through experimental dialects. Through such experimental dialects one will also finally get an understanding of what version of `string` is the best to actually transfer non-strict programs into Scheme.
