On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 5:09:20 AM UTC+2, Alexis King wrote: > While in St. Louis, I had a brief conversation with Jay, Alex, and Jack about > how we all happen to have our own implementation of Clojure’s threading > macro. That macro is called -> in Clojure, but I believe Greg’s rackjure > library set the Racket standard of calling it ~>, since the arrow is already > used by contracts and types (and the FFI, too, for that matter). I have no > idea how many implementations of this macro exist in the wild, but 5 is > already far too many.
With Refinements being currently added (http://andmkent.com/blog/2015/07/06/stop-2015-talk-adding-practical-dependent-types-to-typed-racket/): 1. Is the argument of using ~> no longer valid since refinements also use it. 2. Is adding refinements going to cause some conflicts with the existing threading implementations? Thanks Greg -- 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.
