From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: binding multiple values (Ex: Re: some small proposed changes to standard) Date: 1999/07/24 Message-ID: <3141799301028302@naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 504697913 References: <199907210420.VAA04718@pacific> mail-copies-to: never Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879; http://www.naggum.no Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * Vassil Nikolov | If the syntax of binding forms is to be extended (which appears a good | idea to me), then perhaps it could be extended in another way as well. | In a recent post, Fernando Mato Mira (I think) suggested that the above | syntax is incompatible with the (hypothetical) desire to have the type | alongside the variable: since LET binding forms are to take a variable and a form, I don't see the need to stuff the type in with the variable. since type information is optional, let's use the standard way to specify optional stuff: add it at the end: (let ((i 0 integer)) ...) (do ((i 0 (1+ i) integer)) ...) and with multiple-value extensions: (let (((q r) (floor a b) (integer integer))) ...) #:Erik -- suppose we blasted all politicians into space. would the SETI project find even one of them?