Re: Linear-update suffix: ! 1 or @ sperber@xxxxxx (20 Aug 1999 06:45 UTC)
Re: Linear-update suffix: ! 1 or @ sperber@xxxxxx 20 Aug 1999 06:45 UTC
>>>>> "Dan" == Dan Bornstein <email@example.com> writes:
Dan> John David Stone:
>> I vote for bang. I think that it's important to reserve
>> special-character prefixes and suffixes for the use of application
>> programmers, so I'm against ``using up'' the whorl character just to
>> provide a visual reminder of a procedure's linear-update effect.
Dan> A data point: I took all the sources from the U Indiana Scheme Repository
Dan> (<URL:ftp://ftp.cs.indiana.edu/pub/scheme-repository/>) and grepped for
Dan> identifiers with "@" in them and found exactly one ("@vv" in Matrices.scm).
Dan> I know there's a lot more Scheme code in the world than the Repository
Dan> holds, but it's a good sample set.
Well, MzScheme uses a @ suffix for units throughout, so there's a lot
of them in *my* code. I vote against it.
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, VÃ¶lkerverstÃ¤ndigung und Ã¼berhaupt blabla