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