This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 26 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 26 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
Sebastian Egner writes: > The fact that the macro does partial application and not proper currying > has indeed spawned a discussion about the name. Please refer to the > previous thread initiated by Stephan Houben. > > In my reply to Stephan I propose the name > > partial-apply > > instead of 'curry'. As always with these kind of choices, a great deal > of it is simply a matter of taste and personal (programming) background. > As I have little experience with ML, my preference is 'partial-apply' as > it also refers to the 'apply' function of Scheme. > > Would 'partial-apply' be fine with you? Well, it would be better than CURRY. On the other hand, I think it's a potential source of confusion, since the interface to your macro is different from that of APPLY, which requires its last argument to be a list. In my work, I've used the name CALL for the following procedure, which is like APPLY except that the arguments are provided severally instead of being bundled into a list: (define call (lambda (procedure . arguments) (apply procedure arguments))) I think of your macro as ``partial CALL'' rather than ``partial APPLY.'' -- John David Stone - Lecturer in Computer Science and Philosophy Manager of the Mathematics Local-Area Network Grinnell College - Grinnell, Iowa 50112 - USA stone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx - http://www.cs.grinnell.edu/~stone/