[r6rs-discuss] Multiple returns from higher-order procedures

From: Alan Watson <alan>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 18:10:27 -0500

William D Clinger wrote:
> To what extent does the push to add new procedures
> to the R6RS, including procedures that are simple
> compositions of other R6RS procedures, derive from
> fear that these procedures would be too slow if
> Scheme programmers were to write them themselves
> or to use a portable reference implementation?

As opposed to being added so that compilers can implement generic
arithmetic with reasonable efficiency using a portable reference
implementation? :-)

Most of the new procedures are not new; they have been around in
different forms in many implementations. The draft R6RS is in most cases
simply standardizing a canonical form.

Regards,

Alan
Received on Mon Jun 25 2007 - 19:10:27 UTC