Subject: Re: Internal defines (was Re: How to do this in Scheme (elegantly)?)
From: (Rob Warnock)
Date: 1996/10/12
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Message-ID: <53ngu2$>

Guillermo (Bill) J. Rozas <> wrote:
| There are several advantages that internal DEFINE has over LETREC.
| 3. It allows you to take code that you've been playing around with
|    (i.e. debugging) at "a top level" and, _without reformatting it_,
|    hide it inside the routine that needs it.  I do this all the time.
|    Having to reformat it as a LETREC would be painful...

Given that I learned a lot of the Scheme I know from SAP, I actually
do exactly the *opposite* of this! ;-}  ;-}  I write all my top-level
routines as (define foo (lambda ...)), which makes it trivial to drop
them into LETRECs later [which is why I thought SAP did it that way, in
fact] or even cut-n-paste just the lambda into some anonymous expression,
if you need to.

But as far as I can tell, either top-level style works fine, as long
as you do it consistently...


Rob Warnock, 7L-551
Silicon Graphics, Inc.
2011 N. Shoreline Blvd.		Phone: 415-933-1673  FAX: 415-933-0979
Mountain View, CA  94043	PP-ASEL-IA