On Sun, 19 Oct 2008, John Cowan wrote: > Andre van Tonder scripsit: > >> I agree. It seems clear that the base cases for /all/ of these should >> be #t. It would be silly if, for example, whether a sequence is >> increasing could be changed from #t to #f by removing the last element. >> Stated another way, all of these are really an intersection (AND) >> of conditions, and the base (0 argument) case for AND is #t. > > That would, however, undermine the otherwise reliable deduction that > when applied to the same arguments, < and => (and likewise > and <=) > produce results of opposite truth value. The same is true of applying < > or <= to the reversal of the arguments of > and >= respectively.
No, it is not otherwise reliable. For example, (< 1 2 1) ==> #f (>= 1 2 1) ==> #f (not #t as you argue) Andre _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
