[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] SRFI 35 & 36

From: Felix Winkelmann
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] SRFI 35 & 36
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 08:35:17 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530

Peter Keller wrote:

Are there any plans to adding these SRFIs and the things they require
to Chicken? If not, why not?

I think SRFI-34/35/36 is broken, for several reasons:

1) The semantics of `raise' are incompatible to SRFI-18
  and (IMHO) unnecessarily complicated. More specifically,
  `guard' is required to re-raise the condition if no clause
  matches, _in_the_dynamic_environment_of_the_initial_raise_
  (it's interesting how long the authors took to get the
  reference implementation right)
2) The syntax is ugly, too reminiscent of ML and not at all
  what I find "Schemish", moreover the "&..." naming convention is awful
  (this is of course more a matter of taste, I admit)

I do agree that it would help having a (semi-)standard condition
system implemented over a range of Scheme implementations.

The `raise' issue really is the main problem, though.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]