It was called option/c until we did option contracts.
(All of this just shows that contracts are not written in
the programming language proper, contrary to our propaganda.)
On May 8, 2014, at 10:29 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
> add1 is fine compared to (+ ... 1), imo, because the name tell
add1 is fine compared to (+ ... 1), imo, because the name tells you
what it is doing, but maybe/c doesn't. It just sends the signal "you
aren't in the club if you don't know what 'maybe' is". Maybe if there
was another name that made that meaning clear I would also be in
favor.
Robby
On Thu, May
I think maybe signals a well-known functional idea.
On May 8, 2014, at 8:03 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
> (or/c #f x)
>
> seems better than maybe/c because it is nearly the same length and it
> is one less thing to memorize (and it's not like single-point of
> control applies here because this c
(or/c #f x)
seems better than maybe/c because it is nearly the same length and it
is one less thing to memorize (and it's not like single-point of
control applies here because this can never change).
Robby
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> (We have maybe/c somewhere,
(We have maybe/c somewhere, and I think we should use it.)
On May 8, 2014, at 4:19 PM, sa...@racket-lang.org wrote:
> samth has updated `master' from 98ae3d8b2d to e1ab2ffcf4.
> http://git.racket-lang.org/plt/98ae3d8b2d..e1ab2ffcf4
>
> =[ One Commit ]=
5 matches
Mail list logo
