[plt-scheme] Please help test version 359.100

From: Robby Findler (robby at cs.uchicago.edu)
Date: Mon Nov 13 18:31:08 EST 2006

At Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:23:34 -0500, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> That's far from clear. I can easily put my Editor hat on and argue that
> "unspecified" means that I can return whatever bits are currently lying
> around in register 137. But you are now one of those, eh, editors. So
> what does your hat say?

Ah - but you're using English. The report is not written in English.
It's written in Reportese.

>From 1.3.2 of R5RS:
> If the value of an expression is said to be ``unspecified,'' then the
> expression must evaluate to some object without signalling an error,
> but the value depends on the implementation; this report explicitly
> does not say what value should be returned.

Is "some object" allowed to be multiple values or not? That text
suggests not.


Posted on the users mailing list.