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> And just Imagine the blank faces of your students when you >felix> tell them about this curious CURRY SRFI that doesn't do currying. > >You're quoting me out of context here. There's a clear connection >between SRFI 26 and currying which is easily explained and the >intuition of which is easily grasped. It's one that occurred >naturally to me, and it occurred naturally to Sebastian. Yet it doesn't seem natural for all, or we wouldn't have this discussion, right? >It's your right to find it confusing or to find my arguments or Sebastian's >weak. But until you can find a better name or better arguments to >convince Sebastian, it's his right to put whatever he wants into SRFI >26. I don't claim the opposite. Actually there are tons of better names: SECTION because that's how other languages call it. SPECIALIZE PARTIAL-LAMBDA PARTIAL-APPLY because that's what it actually does. _I $ because that's at least abbreviating. Otherwise, why use this thing at all? SRFI-26 FOOBAR XYZ because nobody will confuse it with something else. SCHOENFINKELIZE because that's so stupid that hopefully everybody will stay away from this. ;-) See? Loads of alternatives, some of them even say what SRFI-26 is doing. What's the goal of this SRFI? To abbreviate? Then use something *really* short. To clarify? I *seriously* doubt that (list-index (curry eq? <> x) foo) is much clearer than (list-index (lambda (y x) (eq? y x)) foo) cheers, felix