[plt-scheme] about letrec and continuation : which behavior is correct ? and why ?

From: Joe Marshall (jmarshall at alum.mit.edu)
Date: Wed Aug 20 16:11:24 EDT 2008

Local makes me ill.

It's bad enough that the top level doesn't have the same semantics
as internal define, but that's a compromise due to the interactive
nature of top level.  It's worse to promote that behavior to internal
define as well.

On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi <sk at cs.brown.edu> wrote:
>  would you object to it supplanting LETREC?


----- But....
Who would I object to?  And why would anyone care what I thought?
If the semantics of internal define changed enough that the code I
write stopped working, I'd just write an explicit letrec or I'd write a
macro that made it work right again.

I'd certainly not make it the default in my own implementation,
but if you have a portable macro you are free to do what you will.


Posted on the users mailing list.