50 minutes ago, Carl Eastlund wrote: > Why does regexp-match** need to take this extra argument? Can't we > just use map like normal?
I can't parse this. > If we want users to process each match in turn, possibly to allow > early garbage collection, it sounds like an in-regexp-matches > sequence would be better. There might be a place for `in-regexp-whatever's, but that's irrelevant to adding the function I'm talking about. -- ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life! _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev