Tom Breton  <tob@world.std.com> wrote:
+---------------
| IOW, values is basically a backwards-compatibility thing.
| When that's *not* the case, simply returning a list is better in every
| way that springs to mind, IMO.
+---------------

Actually, a third option -- which I find myself using a lot more often
than *either* multiple values or lists -- is to return a structure:

- It's relatively cheap to construct;

- It's cheaper than a list to access elements other than the first; and

- The slot names give you an element of self-documentation that's missing
  with either lists or MVs (that is, on the "values" side of MVs -- the
  using or destructuring side is of course quite self-documenting).

But like the other two, it's not always appropriate. So use the one that is.


-Rob

p.s. In Schemes that don't have structures (there are still a few), I
sometimes return small vectors. That's yet another option in CL, too.

-----
Rob Warnock, 41L-955		rpw3@sgi.com
Applied Networking		http://reality.sgi.com/rpw3/
Silicon Graphics, Inc.		Phone: 650-933-1673
1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy.		PP-ASEL-IA
Mountain View, CA  94043