|
Open issues for SRFI 113
John Cowan
(04 Dec 2013 04:37 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
Kevin Wortman
(08 Dec 2013 04:35 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
John Cowan
(08 Dec 2013 18:05 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
John Cowan
(08 Dec 2013 18:15 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
Kevin Wortman
(09 Dec 2013 00:43 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
John Cowan
(09 Dec 2013 08:04 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
Alex Shinn
(09 Dec 2013 08:16 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
John Cowan
(09 Dec 2013 15:59 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
Alex Shinn
(09 Dec 2013 00:39 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
John Cowan
(09 Dec 2013 17:13 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
Alex Shinn
(10 Dec 2013 01:18 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113 John Cowan (10 Dec 2013 21:35 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
Alex Shinn
(11 Dec 2013 00:55 UTC)
|
|
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
John Cowan
(16 Dec 2013 07:12 UTC)
|
Alex Shinn scripsit:
> I'd have to see it, but I don't think it's worth the
> complexity of supporting both.
It's not too hard; I'll issue another draft.
> The canonical use case is SRFI 13. Many of the procedures
> accept a char/char-set/procedure argument. The only two
> SRFI 14 procedures needed to support that are `char-set?' and
> `char-set-contains?'.
Mmm. What concerns me is that while this works for the "set or
individual" use case, you would need other subsets for other use
cases, and where do you stop?
--
John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org> http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Raffiniert ist der Herrgott, aber boshaft ist er nicht.
--Albert Einstein