[R6RS] Convenient syntax for multiple values

[Manuel Serrano]

> Ah, OK, thanks.  However, that's only if you use the dot notation,
> implying in your source code *that you want a list*.  This case isn't
> covered by MULTIPLE-VALUE-LET/RECEIVE.  For the cases these do cover,
> LET-VALUES generates equivalent code with no list allocation.  Does
> this address your concern?
Yes, it does. My opposition only regards the introduction of the . notation
in the LET-VALUES form. 

-- 
Manuel