[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A value for "nothing"
From: |
Mark H Weaver |
Subject: |
Re: A value for "nothing" |
Date: |
Tue, 28 Aug 2018 13:15:35 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) |
John Cowan <address@hidden> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 11:40 AM Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> That's the phrase used in R7RS-small, which fails to define it, as you
> noted, but that shortcoming is limited to R7RS.
>
> The relevant sentences in R5RS and R7RS are identical: " If <test>
> yields a false value and no <alternate> is specified, then the result
> of the expression is unspecified." Likewise, the paragraph from 1.3.2
> you quote below is identical in both standards. So either they both
> define it or they both don't.
>
> In R6RS, section 11.4.3 (Conditionals) provides this example:
>
> Unlike Wil Clinger, and apparently you, I don't believe that examples
> in specs are normative.
Alright, well, the formal denotational semantics makes it 100%
unambiguous, as I noted in my previous email.
Mark
- Re: A value for "nothing", (continued)
- Re: A value for "nothing", tomas, 2018/08/27
- Re: A value for "nothing", Mark H Weaver, 2018/08/27
- Re: A value for "nothing", Hans Åberg, 2018/08/27
- Re: A value for "nothing", Mark H Weaver, 2018/08/27
- Re: A value for "nothing", Matt Wette, 2018/08/27
- Re: A value for "nothing", Mark H Weaver, 2018/08/28
- Re: A value for "nothing", John Cowan, 2018/08/28
- Re: A value for "nothing", Mark H Weaver, 2018/08/28
- Re: A value for "nothing", Mark H Weaver, 2018/08/28
- Re: A value for "nothing", John Cowan, 2018/08/28
- Re: A value for "nothing",
Mark H Weaver <=
- Re: A value for "nothing", Mark H Weaver, 2018/08/28
Re: A value for "nothing", Panicz Maciej Godek, 2018/08/26
Message not available
Message not available