Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? | Simplelists

Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Jakub T. Jankiewicz (22 Aug 2021 16:51 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Lassi Kortela (23 Aug 2021 14:03 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Lassi Kortela (23 Aug 2021 14:08 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? John Cowan (23 Aug 2021 14:36 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (23 Aug 2021 15:58 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? John Cowan (23 Aug 2021 20:14 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (23 Aug 2021 20:19 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? John Cowan (23 Aug 2021 21:11 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (23 Aug 2021 21:15 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? John Cowan (23 Aug 2021 21:30 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (24 Aug 2021 07:34 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Daphne Preston-Kendal (24 Aug 2021 06:45 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (24 Aug 2021 07:51 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Daphne Preston-Kendal (24 Aug 2021 08:37 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (24 Aug 2021 09:26 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (24 Aug 2021 17:28 UTC)

(missing)

(missing)

Fwd: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (24 Aug 2021 18:38 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Arthur A. Gleckler (24 Aug 2021 17:36 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (24 Aug 2021 17:56 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Lassi Kortela (24 Aug 2021 17:43 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (24 Aug 2021 17:59 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Jakub T. Jankiewicz (24 Aug 2021 08:39 UTC)

Re: Is recieve macro from base implementation of SRFI-1 in fact SRFI-8? Jakub T. Jankiewicz 24 Aug 2021 08:38 UTC


On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 09:50:53 +0200
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for sharing this.  As for the name:  After having rethought it, the
> name "opt-lambda" (or a similar one) is the better name because we already
> have case-lambda (and match-lambda in SRFI 204).
>
> (opt-lambda (x y (z a) . rest)
>   ...)
>
> and not
>
> (opt-lambda (x y (z a) rest)
>   ...)
>

case and match are full words so I would use:

optional-lambda instead of opt-lambda

Just want to be sure that this will not land in SRFI. I don't know all SRFI
but it seems that most functions don't use shortcuts in names.

--
Jakub T. Jankiewicz, Web Developer
https://jcubic.pl/me