Am So., 16. Jan. 2022 um 19:29 Uhr schrieb John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org>:

[...]

>> That said, I am far from being convinced that SRFI 232 is a good idea:
>
>
> Did you read Hemanns's paper yet?  It's at <http://webyrd.net/scheme-2013/papers/HemannCurrying2013.pdf>.  It gives the whys and wherefores of this kind of currying.

The paper doesn't seem to give any real examples of why their form of
currying would simplify programming in Scheme or make it more
elegantly.

They describe that their mechanism is for implicitly currying Scheme
procedures. But we can't redefine standard library procedures with
lambda* instead of lambda, so curried versions have to be provided
from somewhere else. But then it is simpler to curry on the fly (e.g.
with the "!" operator I mentioned, which is just cut with a <...> rest
argument).

>>
>>  the existence of SRFI
>> 26 is not really an argument in favor of SRFI 232.
>
>
> I think it is cited as related work, not as an argument in favor.  It's common for "related work" to be quite different from the work that cites it.

Maybe it wasn't meant as an argument in favor. But this doesn't change
the fact that SRFI 232's rationale does not really have any arguments
in favor (ignoring toy examples).

[...]

Marc