From 6d305d416bf48f0b20ee8c2881564e2be0a662d9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Linus Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 10:20:38 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Added passage about maybe automagically looping --- README.md | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 3be9603..a9998c2 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -98,6 +98,8 @@ Replace that cons with stream-cons and you have a lazy construct. ;; => (1 3 5) (2 4) ``` +In the presence of subloops, only the loop variables of the innermost loop are exposed to named updates. + ### Exposing loop variables The iterator protocol allows exposing the loop variables @@ -305,6 +307,8 @@ Tests! Finish documentation. +Think long and hard about whether loop should loop even without clauses. Definitely not the case for loops that have an identity (the simple forms), but the general loop clause should probably loop indefinitely. + Figure out if I can do anything about branching. I would love to remove the body and just have loop clauses. I don't think I can do that without some serious voodoo if I want to keep the current syntax. One idea would be to define all accumulators in the start of the loop, and then bind identifiers using local macros: ``` scheme