I advocate it too, when I don't have to iterate through arbitrary do-sequences. -Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Neil Van Dyke" <[email protected]> To: "Roman Klochkov" <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2014 8:19:12 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [racket] Style. for/fold for/list for/lists
Roman Klochkov wrote at 01/18/2014 06:25 AM: > Where can I find style guide for these > > for/lists: Wouldn't it be easier to do with named-"let"? I advocate named-"let" sometimes on this email list. Here's the first one I found in Google: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/2012-April/051686.html Neil V. ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
