Similar to what JCG suggested: `find-most`? Vincent
On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 14:37:43 -0500, Daniel Prager wrote: > > find-min and find-max are (already) good names in my opinion. They > shorten both minimum / minimal (maximum / maximal), which works for both > numbers (whence our intuition) and partial orders. > > How about find-min or find-max with an optional keyword argument > #:order-by (defaulting to <)? > > I dislike "best" (and for that matter "worst") because it sounds like > calling a library function involves making a value judgement! > > Dan > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Racket Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
