Re: values->list elements

[szgyg]

Jonathan Wilson wrote:
> szgyg wrote:
> > No, this is impossible without redefining +. A macro produces 1 sexp, 
> > not more.
>
> This is exactly what I am getting at.

Oh, yes, I see.

This isn't a new idea, but the original semantic.

| (this is not a serious proposal for a language extension,
| but only an example):
| (1) Wherever n consecutive arguments might be written in
|     a function call, one may instead write {f x1 ... xm}n,
|     where n is a positive integer. The "function" f must
|     return n values, which are used as n arguments
|     in the function call.
| (2) The primitive (values x1 ... xn) returns its n arguments
|     as its n values. Thus writing "{values x1 ... xn}n" is
|     the same as writing "x1 ... xn" as arguments in a
|     function call.

[Guy L. Steele: LAMBDA: The Ultimate Declarative, 1976, p 18-19]


I think however, that explicit function transformer is a reasonable alternative.

szgyg