"Jason Orendorff" <jason.orendorff_at_gmail.com> writes:
> Section 5.7 of R5.91RS says implementations must detect syntax
> violations. In the definition of (let), section 9.5.6 says, "It is a
> syntax violation for a <variable> to appear more than once in the list
> of variables being bound." Section 9.5.6 then defines (let*) as
>
> similar to let, but the bindings
> are performed sequentially from left to right, and the
> region of a binding indicated by (<variable> <init>) is that
> part of the let* expression to the right of the binding.
>
> I can't tell if the restriction on variable names in (let) is meant to
> apply to (let*). Is the following allowed?
>
> (let* ((foo (make-foo))
> (foo (decorate foo)))
> ...)
Yes; I'll put in a clarifying note. Thanks for spotting this!
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla
Received on Sun Nov 19 2006 - 05:20:53 UTC