[plt-scheme] V4 request for thoughts on various question

From: Sam TH (samth at ccs.neu.edu)
Date: Mon Aug 4 15:38:04 EDT 2008

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Alan Watson <alan at alan-watson.org> wrote:
> Thanks to Robby and Sam for their explanations. Regarding let*, §11.4.6 says
> that "the ⟨init⟩s are evaluated and bindings created sequentially from left
> to right." No room for interleaving there. Nor in letrec*. However, I think
> letrec is still up for grabs.

Definitely.  Certainly the semantics of `letrec*' and `let*' are
unambiguous in this regard.

I expect that the underspecification here of `let' (the discussion
Robby points to does not seem to be intended as defining the semantics
of `let') and `letrec' is merely an oversight by the editors.

sam th
samth at ccs.neu.edu

Posted on the users mailing list.