Left folds
Bradley Lucier
(17 Sep 2022 22:18 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(18 Sep 2022 08:44 UTC)
|
||
(missing)
|
||
(missing)
|
||
Re: Left folds
Bradley Lucier
(20 Sep 2022 14:15 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Sep 2022 14:25 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(22 Sep 2022 20:52 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
Lucier, Bradley J
(22 Sep 2022 21:14 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(23 Sep 2022 09:25 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
John Cowan
(23 Sep 2022 17:22 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(23 Sep 2022 17:30 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds Bradley Lucier (23 Sep 2022 18:39 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
Bradley Lucier
(24 Sep 2022 00:12 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
Arthur A. Gleckler
(24 Sep 2022 00:24 UTC)
|
||
Fwd: Left folds
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(20 Sep 2022 14:17 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
John Cowan
(18 Sep 2022 10:41 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(18 Sep 2022 13:29 UTC)
|
||
Re: Left folds
Bradley Lucier
(20 Sep 2022 00:32 UTC)
|
On 9/23/22 1:22 PM, John Cowan wrote: > What I'd like to do is this: > > For all sequences, provide either `fold` and `fold-right` with SRFI 1 > conventions (the accumulation is the rightmost argument) or `foldl` and > `foldr` with SRFI 43 conventions (accumulator is the leftmost > argument). Currently all the vector-like SRFIs use SRFI 43 conventions > with the names `fold` and `right-fold` as a consequence of being > textually descended from SRFI 43, so these SRFIs would be changed > incompatibly, but at least it is not a silent breaking change. > > I say "leftmost" and "rightmost" because folds over dictionaries pass > three arguments to the folding function: (key value accumulation). I'm going to go with the current semantics and R6RS-style names array-fold-left and array-fold-right. Brad