Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!THINK.COM!gls
From: gls@THINK.COM (Guy Steele)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Subject: Scheme Digest #249
Message-ID: <8911271945.AA01984@ungar.think.com>
Date: 27 Nov 89 19:45:08 GMT
References: <8911230056.aa23623@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Sender: root@athena.mit.edu (Wizard A. Root)
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 22


   Date: Wed, 22 Nov 89 11:55:42 PST
   >From: Pavel.pa@xerox.com
   Subject: Request for Comments: A new n-ary function construction
   Message-ID: <891122-121343-4098@Xerox>

   This note concerns an idea I've been kicking around for some time; I'm
   probably going to implement the idea in Scheme Xerox and I'd like to get
   comments on it from the community at large.  You can consider yourselves as
   design consultants...
   ...

   [Note: I'll point out right here that nobody I've shown this to has liked
   having strings in the lambda-list.  It just seemed better to me than
   &arbitrary or #!arbitrary.  Suggestions are solicited.]

Instead of a string, how about using the number 69 ?  :-)

--Guy

P.S. Otherwise it is an interesting idea.  Are you sure that
improving the LEXPR mechanism isn't gilding a sow's ear?