[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: OK, how about...
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.
> One thing I've wanted that the proposal doesn't cover is the ability to
> reorder the arguments.
There are cases where it is indeed useful to permute the
arguments of a procedure with a simple notation.
Yet, I am convinced that the chance of confusion
is considerably higher with numbered variables than with
properly named variables and this is not worth it.
That is the primary reason why I have chosen not to include
this feature into the SRFI. If you need to permute the arguments,
write down a lambda-_expression_.
There are some secondary reasons, too. In the first place,
one has to limit the number of possible arguments by an
argument of the "640K should be enough for anybody"-type,
which I generally distaste. Limiting to 30 arguments might
not seem severe, but if you deal with computer-generated
code it can easily become a limit. There is no way out (I
tried) but if you start introducing (<> 1) (<> 2) .. or
the like then you are loosing the real benefit (a compact
notation for specialization) very quickly.
That is why I have a preference for not introducing