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

[John Cowan]

Graham Fawcett scripsit:

> For representing sql-null, the special immediate-type solution is best
> because it's unambiguous. If that were ruled out, simply using the
> symbol 'null -- and forbidding database layers from returning symbols
> as output-values other than 'null -- would be my second choice, but
> it's an inferior solution, and I have a feeling I'd regret it later.

It also doesn't scale to foreign environments other than SQL ones.

> But please not '(), for the same reason not #f, 0, or an empty string.

+1

> I don't want to see a circus of immediate types either, but one more
> isn't horrible. I thought (void) was perfect for this, but I respect
> the concerns that have been raised. So, (void) needs a brother who has
> no semantic baggage.

+1

-- 
John Cowan              http://www.ccil.org/~cowan      address@hidden
"After all, would you consider a man without honor wealthy, even if his
Dinar laid end to end would reach from here to the Temple of Toplat?"
"No, I wouldn't", the beggar replied.  "Why is that?" the Master asked.
"A Dinar doesn't go very far these days, Master.        --Kehlog Albran
Besides, the Temple of Toplat is across the street."      The Profit