If you can make syntax identifier thingies like and behave as in a short-cutting way when they are used in a context such as andmap, I have no objections.
By coincidence, I talked to Vincent an idea like that today but not and and andmap. On Dec 10, 2012, at 8:53 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Matthias Felleisen > <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: >> >> Using and and or as higher-order functions, say for (fold (combine f and) #t >> l) has performance implications. It is quite different from (andmap f l). > > In one sense, this is obviously true, since `andmap` is > short-circuiting. But with a sightly different implementation of > `andmap`, I think (based on looking at the decompiled output) that > these would generate basically identical code. So the extra > higher-orderness shouldn't be a performance problem here. > > Sam
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
