Am 29.10.2015 um 20:57 schrieb John Cowan: > "Jörg F. Wittenberger" scripsit: > >> However when it comes to `fold` I'm not sure if it is better to follow >> the srfi-1 argument order (combiner-initial-set) or the srfi-69 style >> order (set-combiner-initial). > > SRFI-1 rules, SRFI-69 (in this respect) drools. The in-progress SRFI > 125 uses SRFI 1 order.
I haven't been aware of SRFI-125 nor srfi-114 so far. Taking hints I'll simply allow both orderings for the -table interfaces and go with the srfi-1 ordering for immutable trees. Furthermore the llrb-treetype had already grown in the meantime to include a key? argument. Adding one more for the here unused hash function make it equivalent to srfi-114's comparators. Thus I better use the latter. John, does a chicken implementation already exist? Thanks /Jörg _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
