Very minor point, but is there a rationale beyond historical precedent for + and * to allow any number of arguments but, =, <=, <, >, >= to require at least two arguments?
It seems more uniform for the comparators to return #t when given 0 or 1 arguments rather than an error. It would allow writing (apply < xs) instead of (or (null? xs) (null? (cdr xs)) (apply < xs)). (Notice I left - out of the discussion. Since - already has non-uniform behavior for 1 argument, it seems fine to raise an error for 0 arguments.) (No, I don't really care about this detail.) --Dan _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
