This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 33 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 33 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
Alfresco Petrofsky <alfresco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Just for a little context, play this game: ask yourself, "How many > > functions are there from two booleans to a boolean?" Go ahead; work > > it out. Then you will see that SRFI 33 provides a name for every one > > of them, and defines one operation for each such function > > > That is the *core idea* underlying that part of the library. > > In one sense, the srfi "provides a name" for bitwise-const0, etc., but > in the words of the srfi these operations are "not provided". > > In a previous email you said that providing these would be "beyond the > pale", but now you say they are part of "the *core idea*". > > I could go either way, but I'm a little confused by your rhetoric. The library *does* provide a name for what you're calling bitwise-const0. It's `0'. (Sure, you had that before you loaded the library, too, but that's not the point.)