From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mikael Djurfeldt Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: doco srfi-1 delete, delete-duplicates Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 13:52:03 +0200 Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87fznj2097.fsf@zip.com.au> <87u1bzponh.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> <20030513092528.GB28885@www> Reply-To: djurfeldt@nada.kth.se NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1052826915 31818 80.91.224.249 (13 May 2003 11:55:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 11:55:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Rob Browning Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 13 13:55:13 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19FYMt-0008GC-00 for ; Tue, 13 May 2003 13:54:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19FYNS-0003Xd-00 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 May 2003 07:55:26 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19FYMV-00032m-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 May 2003 07:54:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19FYLw-0002W4-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 May 2003 07:53:54 -0400 Original-Received: from kvast.blakulla.net ([213.212.20.77]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19FYLC-0001qY-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 May 2003 07:53:06 -0400 Original-Received: from dyna224-227.nada.kth.se ([130.237.224.227] helo=witch ident=mail) by kvast.blakulla.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19FYKx-0005pw-00; Tue, 13 May 2003 13:52:51 +0200 Original-Received: from mdj by witch with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19FYKB-0000ME-00; Tue, 13 May 2003 13:52:03 +0200 Original-To: tomas@fabula.de In-Reply-To: <20030513092528.GB28885@www> (tomas@fabula.de's message of "Tue, 13 May 2003 11:25:28 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1001 (Gnus v5.10.1) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) Original-cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-cc: djurfeldt@nada.kth.se X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2349 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2349 tomas@fabula.de writes: > On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 09:26:58PM -0500, Rob Browning wrote: >> Kevin Ryde writes: >> >> > I was sorely tempted to change the "=" formal parameter to something >> > like "eproc", to avoid any chance of it being confused with the core >> > "=" procedure. But if that's to be done then I suppose it should be >> > throughout the chapter, not just in one node. >> >> Same temptation here. Perhaps cmp, or comparison, or cmp-func... > > Cmp is good (since, as the example shows, it's not just about some > kind of equality). Pred or predicate might be a candidate as well. > (but I like cmp best). ...and I think "cmp" is cryptic, arbitrary and ugly, while "=" is beautiful, and I don't think there is any risk of confusion. I think the original "=" is good taste. :-) And if you guys anyway want to change it, please 1. give it a readable name (e.g. equal-predicate?), and 2. make sure to put a `?' after it (if it is a textual name) to indicate that it is a predicate. M _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel