[plt-scheme] Unnecessary use of letrec?

From: Robby Findler (robby at cs.uchicago.edu)
Date: Fri Jun 15 10:20:59 EDT 2007

In practice, it is nearly impossible to restrict yourself to the
things guaranteed by R5RS (there are tools that help if you are
interested in portability; see Dorai Sitaram's paper in the 2003
Scheme Workshop) so most people don't try unless there is a good
reason (like you want to develop with drscheme, but run with Chez
scheme (which is much faster but costs money) or you want your tool to
be used by all of the Schemes).

It looks like R6 is going to make this MUCH easier, so we may see more
people being careful in this regard.


On 6/15/07, Grant Rettke <grettke at acm.org> wrote:
> Do most folks using mzscheme or DrS just go ahead and use the correct
> form according to R5RS or instead rely on how it works in mz or DrS?
> On 6/15/07, Robby Findler <robby at cs.uchicago.edu> wrote:
> > On 6/14/07, Grant Rettke <grettke at acm.org> wrote:
> > > It seems I could replace this letrec with let and be guaranteed the
> > > same behavior?
> >
> > Yes. (But not necc. in other Schemes).
> >
> > Robby
> >

Posted on the users mailing list.