Failure continuations for fxmapping-update and friends
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe 20 Jun 2021 21:58 UTC
A rather glaring inconsistency that I just discovered in SRFI 224 is
that fxmapping-update-min and -max both take optional 'failure'
continuations, while fxmapping-update does not. I'd like to fix this.
What's preferable to you--'failure's for both, or neither?
More generally, when should we choose this pattern over returning
a default value or signaling an error? The SRFIs differ on this
point.
--
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe <xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz>
"If work is to become play, then tools must become toys."
--Lee Felsenstein
