Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!netcomsv!netcom.com!hbaker
From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry G. Baker)
Subject: Re: non-existent aesthetics of multiple-value-bind
Message-ID: <hbakerD0tM45.6y5@netcom.com>
Organization: nil
References: <D0JGt5.G0@rheged.dircon.co.uk> <19941212T054916Z.enag@naggum.no> <D0rs6v.1q0@rheged.dircon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 1994 21:52:53 GMT
Lines: 24

In article <D0rs6v.1q0@rheged.dircon.co.uk> simon@rheged.dircon.co.uk (Simon Brooke) writes:
>In article <19941212T054916Z.enag@naggum.no>,
>Erik Naggum  <erik@naggum.no> wrote:
>>Simon Brooke
>>|   You can ignore Guy Steele's claim that multiple-value-bind is cleaner.
>>|   He is entitled to his own aesthetics.
>>
>>this also applies to you, of course.  I choose to ignore _your_ aesthetics.

I prefer the original Dylan syntax (from Moon??) for mvbind:

(let ((quotient remainder (floor dividend divisor)))
  (print quotient)
  (print remainder))

This version has the advantage of allowing mvbind to be used
with normal binding in a let expression.

Henry Baker
Read (192.100.81.1) ftp.netcom.com:/pub/hb/hbaker/README for ftp-able papers.
WWW archive: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/hb/hbaker/home.html
************* Note change of address ^^^        ^^^^
(It _is_ accessible, but Netcom is loaded; keep trying.)

