Mark H Weaver skribis:
> I think we should back out this change to SRFI-45. The only thing I
> think we should keep is the addition of 'promise?' to the list of
> exports (as is done in Racket).
[...]
> Having thought more on this, I've come to agree with you. It's a
> mistake to bend over ba
Hello all,
After some discussion with Eli Barzilay on the SRFI-45 mailing list [1],
I've come to believe it's a mistake to extend it in a suboptimal way.
'eager' should have the same API as 'delay'. I'd rather do the job
right, even if that means moving it to a different module.
I think we shoul
Hi Ian,
Ian Price writes:
> Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>> Any objections to pushing this to stable-2.0?
>
> Change is simple enough, and it matches the behaviour of built-in
> force/delay. Should be a rubber stamp IMO :)
Agreed :)
> I note Eli Barzilay contributed some changes in the post-finali
Here's an improved patch that updates the manual and adds tests.
Mark
>From 220fb56249b462ad1b205a45a4953e6dc857c96e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mark H Weaver
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 20:01:12 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] SRFI-45: Support delayed expressions that return multiple
Mark H Weaver writes:
> Any objections to pushing this to stable-2.0?
Change is simple enough, and it matches the behaviour of built-in
force/delay. Should be a rubber stamp IMO :)
I note Eli Barzilay contributed some changes in the post-finalisation
archive for srfi 45 to support multiple valu
--8<---cut here---end--->8---
Any objections to pushing this to stable-2.0?
Mark
>From bbaca34ea0158ad84e692d631ee8efc85a18b81e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mark H Weaver
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 20:01:12 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] SRFI-45: Support delayed expressions that
