Matthias Felleisen wrote:
Would you have been happier if match-define had been named define-match, the way it should have been done if we had insisted on consistency in coding guidelines?
Your cond would have looked like this:
(cond ...
[(condition? z-sig)
(define x (compute-x z))
(define-match (foo y-bar y-baz) ...)
(define-values (a b) ...)
(define (f x y z w) 0)
(the-computation x y-baz a b)]
...)
I think so. I might not even mind the extra verboseness. It's certainly
easier to read.
You and your coding guidelines. :p
Neil T
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
