Re: [Chicken-users] mathematical oddities

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 08:58:04PM +0200, Peter Bex wrote: On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:49:34AM -0700, Shawn Rutledge wrote: (which I'm not sure is the best way, I just wrote it late last night) (and that was before I googled and discovered the Douglas-Peucker line simplification algo, which

[Chicken-users] for-each should signal error if given a non-list?

Could we make for-each signal an error if given some argument (other than the first) which is not a list? In Chicken 3.4.0, evaluating (for-each 0 0) correctly signaled an error: Error: (for-each) argument is not a proper list: 0 4.5.0 seems to just silently ignore the typing error. Could we

Re: [Chicken-users] for-each should signal error if given a non-list?

* Alejandro Forero Cuervo a...@freaks-unidos.net [100717 21:15]: Could we make for-each signal an error if given some argument (other than the first) which is not a list? In Chicken 3.4.0, evaluating (for-each 0 0) correctly signaled an error: Error: (for-each) argument is not a proper