[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode)
From: |
Bruce Korb |
Subject: |
Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode) |
Date: |
Mon, 17 May 2004 14:57:55 -0700 |
Marius Vollmer wrote:
>
> address@hidden (Paul Jarc) writes:
>
> > Dirk Herrmann <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> The names scm_is_true and scm_is_false don't fit into the schema,
> >> since true and false are no types.
> >
> > We might think of these scm_is_* functions more generally as
> > predicates, some of which happen to be type predicates.
>
> Right; that's what I had in mind. I also propose scm_is_eq, for
> example.
Would that yield #t if its argument were the `eq' operator, or
would it work on two arguments and yield #t if the two arguments
were equal? :-)
- Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode), (continued)
- Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode), Dirk Herrmann, 2004/05/15
- Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode), Marius Vollmer, 2004/05/17
- Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode), Marius Vollmer, 2004/05/17
- Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode), Marius Vollmer, 2004/05/17
- Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode), Marius Vollmer, 2004/05/17
- Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode), Marius Vollmer, 2004/05/17
- Re: GH replacement proposal (includes a bit of Unicode),
Bruce Korb <=