[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Plausible alists

From: Michael Sperber <sperber>
Date: Tue Oct 24 07:19:16 2006

Andre van Tonder <andre_at_het.brown.edu> writes:

> Slight defect in plausible alist description.
>
> Description:
> ------------
>
> Point 1 does not check that (car x) is a pair as is done in point 3.

Could you elaborate on why it should? The first two items simply
codify that, even if n is 0, some minimal checking is done on the
alleged plausible alist. (Maybe I'm missing something trivial---this
stuff makes my head spin.)

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V?lkerverst?ndigung und ?berhaupt blabla
Received on Tue Oct 24 2006 - 07:19:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Oct 23 2024 - 09:15:01 UTC