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

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 43 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 43 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

*To*: srfi-43@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Subject*: Re: VECTOR-MAP/INDEX*From*: Sven.Hartrumpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Date*: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 09:56:06 +0100 (CET)*Delivered-to*: srfi-43@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*In-reply-to*: <A1711AAC-3044-11D8-9172-000A95CCCEE4@xxxxxxxxxxxx>*References*: <1A421954-2F4A-11D8-9172-000A95CCCEE4@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <y9lr7z5p4pi.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <A1711AAC-3044-11D8-9172-000A95CCCEE4@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

On 16 Dec 2003, Taylor Campbell <campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > (One minor bit that I haven't really gotten anyone else's opinion on, > but I've been planning on anyways: is anyone opposed to switching the > comparator in VECTOR-BINARY-SEARCH to returning negative/zero/positive > integers, rather than the symbols LT/EQ/GT?) No. Many advocate this behavior (integers). For example, this was proposed for sorting with three-way comparison functions (Sort Libraries - SRFI-32). (Unfortunately, SRFI-32 has been withdrawn, and the rumours that it will become active again to complete the missing 5% seem to be wrong :-( ) Greetings Sven

**Attachment:
pgpwBQkhVbVEI.pgp**

**References**:**Re: VECTOR-MAP/INDEX***From:*Taylor Campbell

**Re: VECTOR-MAP/INDEX***From:*Michael Sperber

**Re: VECTOR-MAP/INDEX***From:*Taylor Campbell

- Prev by Date:
**Re: VECTOR-ANY and VECTOR-EVERY** - Next by Date:
**Re: VECTOR-MAP/INDEX** - Previous by thread:
**Re: VECTOR-MAP/INDEX** - Next by thread:
**Re: VECTOR-MAP/INDEX** - Index(es):