Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ?

[David Kastrup]

Bertrand Bordage <address@hidden> writes:

> "define-procedure" sounds too generic to me.  Why not
> "define-void-procedure" ?

That's two distinctions from define-*-function and we need just one as
far as I can see.  If we have define-void-procedure, what would be a
non-void procedure?  If there is no such thing as a non-void procedure,
why make the word more complicated than necessary?  If there is, what
makes it different from a function?

-- 
David Kastrup