[plt-scheme] What is your take on match-lambda?

match-lambda would be a lot more useful if it took multiple arguments.
 That's why I don't use it that much.

N.

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 5:26 AM, Grant Rettke <grettke at acm.org> wrote:
> The first time I read the PLT documentation I was delighted to find
>  match-lambda. Since then, I haven't seen it very often.
>
>  Searching through the PLT v372 installation, there aren't many matches
>  (34 files).
>
>  What is your take on it? Is it in "good style" to utilize it?
>
>  Do you utilize it more for de-structuring/binding arguments contained
>  in a list, or for declarative(?) style function definitions?
>
>  (define fact
>   (match-lambda
>     [0 1]
>     [n (* n (fact (sub1 n)))]))