[r6rs-discuss] "Unspecified"

[Robby Findler]

At Mon, 02 Oct 2006 07:32:52 -0700, Per Bothner wrote:
> Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> > You are correct. My intention was to write the following:
> > 
> > (define (for-each/logging f l)
> >     (for-each (lambda (v) (let ([w (f v)]) (display w) (newline) w)) l))
> > 
> > which has the problem I was attempting to point out.
> 
> In R5RS or draft R6RS the result of set-vector! is unspecified
> anyway, so the above display is undefined.  So I don't think
> I understand your concern.

He's talking about standard practice.