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.
>>>>> "felix" == felixundduni <felix> writes: felix> I agree. >> felix> (After all, what's so "unintuive" about `section'? After all felix> this is *exactly* what SRFI-26 does. Using terminology that is felix> already in common use (Haskell) is the obvious solution, IMHO) >> >> I think, when you're arguing about intuition, you need to show why >> something is intuitive, not why something is not unintuitive. Many >> Scheme programmers aren't Haskell programmers or ML programmers first. >> When I tell students I'm teaching ML or Haskell "this is called >> operator section," there's always row after row of blank faces. They >> don't find this intuitive at all. I completely fail to see why it >> should be "obvious." felix> I don't understand that example you give. Once a term has been coined felix> it might as well be used. Would your students find `named let' intuitive? They actually do. I don't see why a term coined somewhere else needs to be used *here*. felix> No offense, Mr. Egner, but this is ridiculous. I'm Mr. Sperber, actually. (Even though some people might find "Mr. Egner" more intuitive :-) ) -- Cheers =8-} Mike Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla