[R6RS] Splitting hairs over `map' and friends
William D Clinger
will at ccs.neu.edu
Tue Aug 15 07:11:58 EDT 2006
Mike wrote:
> We say that `map' must accept a procedure of as many arguments as
> there are list arguments to `map'. (By virtue of R5RS saying "must".)
> Is an implementation required to check this even if the argument
> list(s) is/are empty?
No. It is *impossible* for an implementation to check
this safely using only the operations specified in
R5RS or (so far) R6RS. Consider, for example:
(map (lambda (x . rest)
(cond ((null? rest) <ok1>)
((null? (cdr rest)) <ok2>)
(else (error ...))))
'()
'()
'())
Will
More information about the R6RS
mailing list