https://github.com/plt/racket/wiki/Racket2
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote: > I think this a great change for a future `racket2' (someone should be > keeping a list of these), but it's too incompatible a change for `cond' > in `racket'. > > At Tue, 2 Oct 2012 09:52:38 -0400, Carl Eastlund wrote: >> I often wish cond would raise an exception if all the tests failed and >> there were no else clause. I have taken to writing a macro to enforce >> this; I usually call it cond!. The void default for cond seems like an >> un-Racketish holdover from primarily-imperative programming. With some of >> the other changes we've made in Racket, are we willing to consider changing >> the fall-through behavior of cond? It seems like an experiment worth >> running to me. >> >> If not, I would at least like to add an erroring version of cond somewhere >> in the language. It's a shame to have to keep writing such a primitive >> feature. Right now in my dracula github repo I have cond! implemented in >> racket/cond and re-exported from racket, but I'm not thrilled about either >> the location or the name. I kept it out of racket/base so I could depend >> on the syntax collection for good source location reporting in the error >> message. >> >> Carl Eastlund >> _________________________ >> Racket Developers list: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev > _________________________ > Racket Developers list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev -- Jay McCarthy <j...@cs.byu.edu> Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93 _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
