On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 07:58:18AM +0000, Dan Muresan wrote:
> > Rather than introducing novel "forall" and "exists" procedures, the
> > "any" and "every" procedures of SRFI-1 should be adopted, along
> > with the language of SRFI-1 describing them. SRFI-1 is a very
> > successful list library and should be used as the basis for
> > selective inclusion of new list-related features in R6RS.
>
> I agree with this and with the map / for-each observations. Existing SRFI
> functionality should be replicated as much as possible, and almost never
> abrdged or contradicted. Existing code should be upgradable with the
> minimum number of changes.
+1
--
Trent Buck, Student Errant
Received on Sun Oct 01 2006 - 20:24:24 UTC