This site is a static rendering of the Trac instance that was used by R7RS-WG1 for its work on R7RS-small (PDF), which was ratified in 2013. For more information, see Home.
Source for ticket #193
cc
changetime
2011-09-11 07:43:44
component
WG1 - Core
description
Why not specifying that arguments in a procedure call should evaluate to exactly one value ?
Similarly binding init would evaluate to only one value.
id
193
keywords
milestone
owner
alexshinn
priority
major
reporter
medernac
resolution
wontfix
severity
status
closed
summary
values and procedure arguments
time
2011-05-21 14:28:52
type
defect
Changes
Change at time 2011-09-11 07:43:44
author
cowan
field
comment
newvalue
WG1 rejected this proposal.
oldvalue
4
raw-time
1315701824000000
ticket
193
time
2011-09-11 07:43:44
Change at time 2011-09-11 07:43:44
author
cowan
field
resolution
newvalue
wontfix
oldvalue
raw-time
1315701824000000
ticket
193
time
2011-09-11 07:43:44
Change at time 2011-09-11 07:43:44
author
cowan
field
status
newvalue
closed
oldvalue
reopened
raw-time
1315701824000000
ticket
193
time
2011-09-11 07:43:44
Change at time 2011-05-30 22:49:32
author
medernac
field
comment
newvalue
No, the problem is about allowing or not values to interfere with another one.
For instance :
{{{
((lambda (X Y) ...) (values A B) (values))
}}}
Do we allow implementations to bind A to X and B to Y ?
oldvalue
3
raw-time
1306770572000000
ticket
193
time
2011-05-30 22:49:32
Change at time 2011-05-30 22:49:32
author
medernac
field
resolution
newvalue
oldvalue
worksforme
raw-time
1306770572000000
ticket
193
time
2011-05-30 22:49:32
Change at time 2011-05-30 22:49:32
author
medernac
field
status
newvalue
reopened
oldvalue
closed
raw-time
1306770572000000
ticket
193
time
2011-05-30 22:49:32
Change at time 2011-05-29 19:50:50
author
alexshinn
field
comment
newvalue
The R5RS (and current draft) make it very specific that
passing MV to a continuation other than that created by
`call-with-values` is an error. Unless you want to
strengthen this and require it to signal an error (thus
making extensions like the CL MV behavior) then there's
nothing to vote on.
oldvalue
2
raw-time
1306673450000000
ticket
193
time
2011-05-29 19:50:50
Change at time 2011-05-29 19:50:50
author
alexshinn
field
resolution
newvalue
worksforme
oldvalue
raw-time
1306673450000000
ticket
193
time
2011-05-29 19:50:50
Change at time 2011-05-29 19:50:50
author
alexshinn
field
status
newvalue
closed
oldvalue
new
raw-time
1306673450000000
ticket
193
time
2011-05-29 19:50:50
Change at time 2011-05-24 05:50:20
author
arcfide
field
comment
newvalue
IMO, better to take the R6RS language that the continuations of the arguments to a procedure call expect a single value, and that passing multiple values to a single-value continuation context is unspecified.
oldvalue
1
raw-time
1306191020000000
ticket
193
time
2011-05-24 05:50:20