On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 9:20 AM Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <[email protected]> wrote:
> > If an unspecified return could be "zero or more values", then the same > > expression could return a different number of values each time. A test > > can't reliably catch that. > It certainly can, using (receive vals expr vals), which binds to a list of the values returned by expr and then returns them. There are a variety of equivalent expressions using let-values and call-with-values. That said, it is IMO better to stick with the existing R7RS-small convention and then leave it to be considered by Committee C (which I believe already has an issue for this) at a later stage. Having an inconsistent convention benefits nobody.
