The name of "keyword-call"
John Cowan
(22 Oct 2019 19:42 UTC)
|
Re: The name of "keyword-call"
Lassi Kortela
(22 Oct 2019 19:56 UTC)
|
Re: The name of "keyword-call"
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(23 Oct 2019 06:00 UTC)
|
Re: The name of "keyword-call"
Lassi Kortela
(23 Oct 2019 07:32 UTC)
|
Re: The name of "keyword-call"
Rhys Ulerich
(23 Oct 2019 12:10 UTC)
|
Re: The name of "keyword-call"
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(23 Oct 2019 13:37 UTC)
|
Re: The name of "keyword-call"
John Cowan
(23 Oct 2019 13:52 UTC)
|
Re: The name of "keyword-call" Lassi Kortela (23 Oct 2019 14:03 UTC)
|
Re: The name of "keyword-call"
John Cowan
(23 Oct 2019 14:23 UTC)
|
Re: The name of "keyword-call"
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(23 Oct 2019 14:34 UTC)
|
Re: The name of "keyword-call"
John Cowan
(23 Oct 2019 15:47 UTC)
|
Re: The name of "keyword-call" Lassi Kortela 23 Oct 2019 14:03 UTC
> As for being > no longer than apply, apply is meant to be used as a special case of > function calling, not the ordinary and natural case. keyword-call is also a special case in standard Scheme. I chose the long name "keyword-call" deliberately to call attention to it, though I'll accept "kwcall" or even "kcall" if others prefer it. Racket has keyword-apply, so keyword-call is a nice analogy to that one. (IMHO keyword-apply is really messy to use in practice; it's the best argument for CL-style keywords). If R7RS-large gets keyword arguments, are special keyword-call and keyword-lambda needed there at all? Can't ordinary procedure calls and lambda do keywords?