[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide
From: |
Benedikt Rosenau |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide |
Date: |
Wed, 7 Nov 2007 15:29:11 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4i |
On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 06:02:42AM -0800, Elf wrote:
> of course it does :) all closures have their own namescope, as you put it.
"Namescope" is what I come up with when lacking caffeine. That bug
has been fixed in the meantime.
> what you demonstrated above is the trick of associating state with a
> lambda. :)
Yes. I mentioned it because newbies might follow the conversation.
As far as the style guide is concerned, I think it is useful to keep
the possibly differing semantics in mind:
(define (bla blubb) ; accept all bindings as they are now
...)
(define bla ; I need some original bindings here
(let ((...))
(lambda (blubb) ...)))
So, (define (bla blubb) ...) is my default. I agree with all the
reasons you gave.
NB: the Chicken compiler assumes standard bindings by default.
Hence, redefining * will work in csi, but it will not work, if
compiled without (declare (not standard-bindings *)).
Benedikt
- [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide, (continued)
- [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide, Tobia Conforto, 2007/11/05
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide, Sunnan, 2007/11/05
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide, F. Wittenberger, 2007/11/06
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide, Sunnan, 2007/11/06
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide, Kon Lovett, 2007/11/06
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide, Sunnan, 2007/11/07
- Message not available
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide, Sunnan, 2007/11/07
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide, Elf, 2007/11/06
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide, Benedikt Rosenau, 2007/11/07
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide, Elf, 2007/11/07
- Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Style Guide,
Benedikt Rosenau <=