On 19 Nov 2022, at 01:35, Shiro Kawai <shiro.ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That part is resolved by the replies to my post. Sensible base cases can be
> defined, and it makes sense to have them taking zero arguments.
Can you formally define them and show that they are a correct base case, in the
sense of being of null effect if appended to the end of another arguments list?
I can observe how the sample implementation behaves (emergently) when given no
comparator arguments, but I’m still far from certain that they’re correct in a
compositional sense.
>> If it would really help, I will change this, although all it would do is
>> split four sentences into four bullet points with nearly identical – it’s
>> not one big run-on sentence, much as I do have a tendency to write those.
>
> I think it helps. For example, the first sentence of make-product-comparator
> says "a comparator which compares ..."; but the defining term used in
> srfi-128 comparators is "equality predicate" and "ordering predicate", so it
> is clear to define "compare" in terms of those predicates.
Okay, I will do this.
Arthur, could the last call be extended a few days while I/we work out the
details of the issue with no arguments passed to make-{sum,product}-comparator?
Daphne
