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 no longer valid since refinements also use it. 2.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 [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
