login signup
Have one-argument '<? et al function as 'make<? et al Alan Manuel Gloria (26 Feb 2014 04:16 UTC)
Re: Have one-argument '<? et al function as 'make<? et al Kevin Wortman (28 Feb 2014 06:39 UTC)
Re: Have one-argument '<? et al function as 'make<? et al Alan Manuel Gloria (28 Feb 2014 22:00 UTC)
Re: Have one-argument '<? et al function as 'make<? et al Kevin Wortman (09 Mar 2014 05:03 UTC)
Re: Have one-argument '<? et al function as 'make<? et al John Cowan (09 Mar 2014 19:49 UTC)
Re: Have one-argument '<? et al function as 'make<? et al Alan Manuel Gloria (15 Mar 2014 10:02 UTC)
Re: Have one-argument '<? et al function as 'make<? et al Alan Manuel Gloria (15 Mar 2014 10:08 UTC)
Re: Have one-argument '<? et al function as 'make<? et al John Cowan 09 Mar 2014 19:49 UTC 
Kevin Wortman scripsit:

> If I understand correctly, you want to be able to take a comparison
> predicate such as <? and a comparator, and produce a comparison procedure
> that uses that comparator without having to explicitly pass it as as an
> argument.

That is the whole point of make=?, make<?, etc.

--
John Cowan        http://ccil.org/~cowan   xxxxxx@ccil.org
Lope de Vega: "It wonders me I can speak at all.  Some caitiff rogue
did rudely yerk me on the knob, wherefrom my wits yet wander."
An Englishman: "Ay, belike a filchman to the nab'll leave you
crank for a spell." --Harry Turtledove, Ruled Britannia