Jim, I would like to know why (case) is excluded from this proposal.
Regards, Pjotr On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 10:44 -0500, Jim Wise wrote: > Per Bothner <p...@bothner.com> writes: > > > The (default/preferred) syntax for lambda should do pattern-matching > > *without* having to use a verbose name like match-lambda*. I don't > > want either of these: > > (1) People learning and using Scheme having to mix 2 sets of > > keywords depending on whether they want to use pattern-matching. > > (2) Having to use keywords that are *even more* verbose than R6RS. > > FWIW, with John Cowan's and my changes to the MatchingWise proposal, > importing the (rnrs match) library overrides the following forms from > (rnrs core) and (rnrs control) with versions which do pattern matching > but are otherwise upwardly compatible with the non-pattern matching > versions: > > lambda > case-lambda > let > let* > letrec > > It is intended that importing (rnrs match) will not change the meaning > of any existing code; this way the library lays the groundwork for > making such behavior the default in a future version of the report. > > The proposal is at > > http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/wiki/MatchingWise > _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list r6rs-discuss@lists.r6rs.org http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss