home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!torn!newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!oz
- From: oz@ursa.sis.yorku.ca (Ozan Yigit)
- Subject: Re: Unspecified values in R4RS
- In-Reply-To: bh@anarres.CS.Berkeley.EDU's message of 22 Jan 1993 18: 40:46 GMT
- Message-ID: <OZ.93Jan22174029@ursa.sis.yorku.ca>
- Sender: news@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca (USENET News System)
- Organization: York U. Student Information Systems Project
- References: <BRENT.93Jan22085102@rcx1.ssd.csd.harris.com> <1jp5n7$nm@agate.berkeley.edu>
- <OZ.93Jan22114638@ursa.sis.yorku.ca> <1jpf3e$2m1@agate.berkeley.edu>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 22:40:29 GMT
- Lines: 33
-
- Brian Harvey writes:
-
- | ..I was arguing that, e.g., DISPLAY should be required to return
- | a nonprinting value, instead of "unspecified" as the standard now says.
- | Right now if you write a program like
-
- | (define (praise thing)
- | (display thing)
- | (display " is great!") )
-
- | you get interactions like
-
- | > (praise "Ice cream")
- | Ice cream is great!#f
-
- | which is not what you wanted.
-
- But if you want trivial interactions such as these to work as you would
- like them to, you may just as well do something like what David Kelsden
- sent me the other day:
-
- (define void (string->symbol ""))
-
- (define (praise thing)
- (display thing)
- (display " is great!")
- void)
-
- Is this not easier than changing the whole language definition? ;-)
-
- ... oz
-
-
-