[r6rs-discuss] "Unspecified"

From: Felix <pfr6rs>
Date: Fri Sep 22 08:26:48 2006

On Sep 21, 2006, at 11:14 PM, Robby Findler wrote:

> At Thu, 21 Sep 2006 23:01:02 -0400, Anton van Straaten wrote:
>> However, allegations that these usages are *wrong* in some sense
>> seem to
>> result from a misunderstanding of the sense in which the terms are
>> being
>> used.
>
> I don't think that anyone doubts there is a way to use the language
> consistently, but perhaps if a different word were chosen (the
> "boring"
> value or the "uninteresting" value or the "unit" value (following ML)
> or ...) it would be clearer to casual readers what was going on.

+1 for "unit"

(I personally prefer "unit" to "void", due to exposure to David
Gifford's thoughts on "what void really means", despite precedent
established in C...)

-Felix
Received on Fri Sep 22 2006 - 08:26:42 UTC