[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: set->bag! ambiguity

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 113 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 113 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.



Aubrey Jaffer scripsit:

> But SET->BAG! has two arguments; which comparator is used?

I've changed the text to say the comparators must be the same, which
was my intention, and fixed the code to verify it.  Note that the
"Specification" section says "It is an error for any procedure defined
in this SRFI to be invoked on sets or bags with distinct comparators
(in the sense of eq?)."

The new text and code are in the same place.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan@xxxxxxxx
One art / There is / No less / No more
To do / All things / With sparks / Galore   --Douglas Hofstadter