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.

Ticket 193: values and procedure arguments

2011-09-11 07:43:44
WG1 - Core
alexshinn
major
medernac
wontfix
source
closed
2011-05-21 14:28:52
defect

Why not specifying that arguments in a procedure call should evaluate to exactly one value ?

Similarly binding init would evaluate to only one value.

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.

resolutionworksforme
statusnewclosed

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.

resolutionworksforme
statusclosedreopened

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 ?

resolutionwontfix
statusreopenedclosed

WG1 rejected this proposal.