Kevin Wortman scripsit: > +1. By the principle of minimal surprise, I would prefer to either make do > with using two conventional procedures, or create a new type that behaves > like a conventional record.
I've decided to go with the second choice. > Actually a comparator can be defined by just a well-behaved < predicate and > a hash procedure, True, but that can be very costly, especially for non-atomic data. -- Is not a patron, my Lord [Chesterfield], John Cowan one who looks with unconcern on a man http://www.ccil.org/~cowan struggling for life in the water, and when [email protected] he has reached ground encumbers him with help? --Samuel Johnson _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
