[plt-scheme] symbols redefined in SRFIs

From: Dan Muresan (danmbox at gmail.com)
Date: Mon Oct 23 21:39:52 EDT 2006

> > You're right, there are two issues, but I think there's no need to
> > consider circularity separately.
> I disagree.

I meant for the ultimate purpose of assessing the *usefulness* of
SRFI-1 map's behaviour as opposed to R5RS. No problem though.

> Well, both sides have their pros and cons.  You can't just jump to a
> different meaning for something as basic as `map' when you
> have 3788 uses of it to support.

Sure, no problem, I can see how tastes could go one way or the other...

Still, do you think any non-contrived example *relies* on map raising
an error for unequal lists (that is the only difference, right)?


Posted on the users mailing list.