Re: complexity of mechanism felix winkelmann (12 Apr 2006 19:39 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism Eli Barzilay (12 Apr 2006 20:54 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism felix winkelmann (13 Apr 2006 06:43 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism Eli Barzilay (13 Apr 2006 07:07 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism felix winkelmann (13 Apr 2006 08:04 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism Eli Barzilay (13 Apr 2006 08:26 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism felix winkelmann (13 Apr 2006 09:44 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism John Cowan (13 Apr 2006 11:43 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism John Cowan (13 Apr 2006 11:52 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism Eli Barzilay (13 Apr 2006 12:58 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism felix winkelmann (13 Apr 2006 13:15 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism Eli Barzilay (13 Apr 2006 13:07 UTC)
Re: complexity of mechanism feeley (13 Apr 2006 14:07 UTC)

Re: complexity of mechanism Eli Barzilay 13 Apr 2006 07:07 UTC

On Apr 13, felix winkelmann wrote:
>
> Whether you use roll-your-own keywords by taking symbol/value pairs,
> or whether you wrap up arguments in a data-structure - there _are_
> ways to handle the problem of complex argument lists, and that don't
> require you to fix every call-site (please avoid redundant arguments
> in which situation what is to be preferred - I'm sure you get the
> gist of what I'm saying).

(I'm almost tempted to ask for such ways, but after hashing this for
way too many times I know what to expect.)

> [...]  It's just to easy to put a keyword-enabled interface onto
> everything.  [...]

and that's a very good argument for this srfi.

--
          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                  http://www.barzilay.org/                 Maze is Life!