On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Alejandro Forero Cuervo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If redundancy were a reason for deleting egg functionality, we have > > about seven object systems to get rid of. ;-) > > Ah, but if you pick any two of those, they will have their > differences! > > In this case, however, *absolutely* all usages of the new code are > supported by the old one and it is *impossible* for a user to find any > difference between them (other than the fact that orders' function is > called cmp-key and the combinator's make-</key) no matter how hard > they try.
No worries, I was just joking. :-) I agree, the redundancy is pointless. It's pointless, I say. I'd like to add a (sort/decorated lst cmp key) proc to your orders egg, that calculates the key values only once; this can be more efficient than (sort ... (cmp-key ...)) for cases where key generation is expensive. I think it fits in your egg; are you OK with that? (The name 'decorated' is an allusion to the 'decorate-sort-undecorate' idiom in Python, which this replicates; we can rename to something more clear.) Graham _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
