Re: [Chicken-users] New immediate values (was: DBI)

[John Cowan]

Alaric Snell-Pym scripsit:

> >Gensym values aren't disjoint *in type* from anything else.
> 
> Ah, but disjointness in value is all that's required...

Technically yes, but most of us find predicates like number?, string?,
and symbol? rather handy all the same, and don't want NULL mixed up
with them.  C programmers may be happy with a world where integers,
characters, and booleans are the same thing, but should we be?  It was
not for nothing that Codd made sure his nulls (later divided into A-marks
for the unknown and I-marks for the inapplicable) were quite independent
of concrete types.

-- 
John Cowan  http://ccil.org/~cowan  address@hidden
All "isms" should be "wasms".   --Abbie