Thank you Evan. By the way I just realized that `#!optional` is specific
to chicken anyway which makes this behavior a lot more viable if chicken
users already use it.
Cheers,
Théo
Le 03/03/2020 à 09:21, Evan Hanson a écrit :
Hi Théo,
I don't know whether there are any firm guarantees
Hi Théo,
I don't know whether there are any firm guarantees about that behaviour,
but functionally it's safe to rely on, yes. That idiom you mentioned is
pretty handy, I use it myself sometimes.
Under the hood, #!optional arguments are expanded in a let*-style
binding form (as opposed to a
Hello everyone,
Quick question: is it safe to rely on the fact that positional
parameters are available to definition of optional parameters default
value ?
In other word, is the following procedure OK or does it rely on
implementation detail that may change ?
(define (f a b #!optional
