3 |
affects: HEAD branch_release-1-6 |
affects: HEAD branch_release-1-6 |
4 |
fixed: Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.de>, 2002-02-22 |
fixed: Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.de>, 2002-02-22 |
5 |
|
|
6 |
The macro 'bound?' has been removed from (ice-9 optargs) since it used |
mvo sez: |
|
the magical SCM_UNDEFINED value in a Scheme visible way. |
|
7 |
|
|
8 |
However, 'bound?' is a useful (but not critical) service provided by |
> The macro 'bound?' has been removed from (ice-9 optargs) since it used |
9 |
(ice-9 optargs) that should be reimplemented for 1.6. |
> the magical SCM_UNDEFINED value in a Scheme visible way. |
10 |
|
> |
11 |
We can just make a special, private value and use this for the default |
> However, 'bound?' is a useful (but not critical) service provided by |
12 |
default value, like |
> (ice-9 optargs) that should be reimplemented for 1.6. |
13 |
|
> |
14 |
(define unbound-value (cons* 'unbound)) |
> We can just make a special, private value and use this for the default |
15 |
|
> default value, like |
16 |
(define-public (bound? val) |
> |
17 |
(eq? val unbound-value)) |
> (define unbound-value (cons* 'unbound)) |
18 |
|
> |
19 |
(define (let-o-k-template REST-ARG BINDINGS BODY let-type proc) |
> (define-public (bound? val) |
20 |
(let ((bindings (map (lambda (x) |
> (eq? val unbound-value)) |
21 |
(if (list? x) |
> |
22 |
x |
> (define (let-o-k-template REST-ARG BINDINGS BODY let-type proc) |
23 |
(list x unbound-value))) |
> (let ((bindings (map (lambda (x) |
24 |
BINDINGS))) |
> (if (list? x) |
25 |
`(,let-type ,(map proc bindings) ,@BODY))) |
> x |
26 |
|
> (list x unbound-value))) |
27 |
--- |
> BINDINGS))) |
28 |
|
> `(,let-type ,(map proc bindings) ,@BODY))) |
29 |
No, we can't make that fix. We would be changing the default default |
> |
30 |
value from '#f' to something else. That would be an unacceptable |
> --- |
31 |
interface change. Since it is easy for the user to provide the |
> |
32 |
functionality on its own, we can just leave it as it is. |
> No, we can't make that fix. We would be changing the default default |
33 |
|
> value from '#f' to something else. That would be an unacceptable |
34 |
|
> interface change. Since it is easy for the user to provide the |
35 |
|
> functionality on its own, we can just leave it as it is. |
36 |
|
|
37 |
|
2002-04-24 ttn sez: |
38 |
|
|
39 |
|
> current state "fixed: Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.de>, 2002-02-22" |
40 |
|
> does not address the problems of the bug reporter, whose |
41 |
|
> responsibilities in the process include closing it. that hasn't |
42 |
|
> happened yet. |
43 |
|
|
44 |
|
2002-04-24 rlb sez: |
45 |
|
|
46 |
|
> In the case of bound?, it was not quite right, was documented in NEWS |
47 |
|
> as something you shouldn't expect to stick around, and now it's going |
48 |
|
> away. IMO, after we make sure we have an appropriate NEWS eulogy, we |
49 |
|
> can forget about it. |