SRFI-1 round 2 discussion
Olin Shivers
(17 Feb 1999 21:10 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI-1 round 2 discussion Doug Currie (17 Feb 1999 22:07 UTC)
|
SRFI-1 round 2 discussion
John Stone
(18 Feb 1999 19:41 UTC)
|
Argument order of = equivalence predicates
Olin Shivers
(18 Feb 1999 19:59 UTC)
|
Re: Argument order of = equivalence predicates
Donovan Kolbly
(18 Feb 1999 22:29 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI-1 round 2 discussion
Lars Thomas Hansen
(04 Mar 1999 22:20 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI-1 round 2 discussion Doug Currie 17 Feb 1999 22:07 UTC
At 4:13 PM -0500 2/17/99, Olin Shivers wrote: >[...] >------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >* iota defn > >[...] > >While the proposed IOTA is simpler than the :IOTA and IOTA: functions I've >proposed, in many cases, this just puts the burden of calculation back on the >programmer -- where there is potential for error. Calculating the proper >number of samples is a simple bit of arithmetic, but it's easy to get wrong. >Fencepost errors, getting the floor/ceiling distinction wrong -- there are two >or three little things that can blow you out of the water, and they come up >each time you use the function. So the nice thing about the :IOTA and IOTA: >functions is that you simply say what you want, and the functions give you the >samples. > >I don't intend to fight this one to the death, in part because IOTA is largely >for interactively fooling around. I see three possibilities, and would like to >know how people think: > >- (IOTA count [start step]) only >- My :IOTA and IOTA: only >- All three procedures Fourth option: - IOTA plus an auxiliary function to calculate the proper number of samples e