<no subject> - Simplelists.com

Show/hide message thread

New draft (#4) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Arthur A. Gleckler (02 Jun 2020 18:43 UTC)

Re: New draft (#4) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (02 Jun 2020 18:48 UTC)

Re: New draft (#4) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (02 Jun 2020 19:08 UTC)

Re: New draft (#4) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (02 Jun 2020 19:06 UTC)

Re: New draft (#4) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (02 Jun 2020 19:12 UTC)

New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Arthur A. Gleckler (02 Jun 2020 22:25 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (04 Jun 2020 10:26 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types John Cowan (04 Jun 2020 22:51 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (06 Jun 2020 16:59 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (07 Jun 2020 04:29 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (07 Jun 2020 10:28 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types John Cowan (14 Jun 2020 00:07 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (14 Jun 2020 11:08 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types John Cowan (14 Jun 2020 15:58 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (14 Jun 2020 16:08 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types John Cowan (14 Jun 2020 18:53 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (14 Jun 2020 19:25 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types John Cowan (14 Jun 2020 20:30 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (14 Jun 2020 20:57 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types John Cowan (14 Jun 2020 23:58 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (15 Jun 2020 06:23 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (15 Jun 2020 08:25 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types John Cowan (16 Jun 2020 18:47 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (16 Jun 2020 19:16 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (16 Jun 2020 19:18 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (17 Jun 2020 17:17 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (14 Jun 2020 19:25 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (14 Jun 2020 19:43 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (14 Jun 2020 20:28 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (14 Jun 2020 20:42 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (15 Jun 2020 13:13 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (16 Jun 2020 07:57 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Lassi Kortela (05 Jun 2020 16:12 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types (no sender) (06 Jun 2020 16:59 UTC)

Re: New draft (#5) of SRFI 189: Maybe and Either: optional container types Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe 17 Jun 2020 17:17 UTC

On 2020-06-16 21:17 +0200, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen wrote:
> >> the unfold thing
> >
> > I'm going with this wording:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > So this requires stop? to be called twice.
>
> Thanks! I think that catches the semantics correctly.
>
> Wolfgang, what do you think?

Excellent.  I've updated the unfolds in my tree accordingly.

Regards,

--
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe  <xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz>

"Optimization hinders evolution." --Alan J. Perlis