[r6rs-discuss] "Unspecified"

From: Anton van Straaten <anton>
Date: Mon Oct 2 04:27:28 2006

Trent Buck wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 01:41:50AM +0000, John Cowan wrote:
>
>>Summary: Editors, "the unspecified value" won't fly. Pick something
>>else and insist on it.
>>
>>5:16:59 <twb> The value that is not dead which can eternal lie.
>>05:17:24 <twb> The value that shall not be named.
>>05:17:33 <arcus> absurdity? :] \
>>05:17:37 <twb> The elder value.
>>05:17:37 <mbishop> hah that's what I was thinking twb
>>05:18:20 <astecp> NaV
>>
>>I had proposed "the content-free value" earlier; I would also propose
>>"the useless value".
>
>
> Seriously, my personal preference is for `the meaningless value'.

It was pointed out that such a value has meaning (by virtue of being
enshrined in the semantics), so `the meaningless value' doesn't
completely resolve the semantic suspicion surrounding naming that which
should not be named.

Guy Steele's paper "Building Interpreters by Composing Monads" (1994)
uses the term "Bogon" for a not unrelated purpose. Hmmm....

Anton
Received on Mon Oct 02 2006 - 04:27:51 UTC