From: Peter Bex <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] CR: umask support (#424) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 13:56:15 +0100
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 07:54:08AM -0500, Felix wrote: >> > Should we still have a separate set! procedure, aside from the >> > generic setter? It would make sense to me, since most procedures >> > have both a getter and a setter procedure, regardless of whether >> > they have a generic setter. >> >> You can always define a setter trivially: >> >> (define set-... (setter ...)) > > I know I could but it's inconsistent not to provide it by default. > Unless you're planning to deprecate other setter procedures too, of > course. I think there aren't many left (at least in the posix unit). `set-file-position!' is different (Alex kindly pointed out the silliness of removing it), since it must accept multiple arguments. cheers, felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
