[racket-dev] [plt] Push #24363: master branch updated

From: Eli Barzilay (eli at barzilay.org)
Date: Mon Feb 27 16:39:33 EST 2012

Three hours ago, stamourv at racket-lang.org wrote:
> f420edc Vincent St-Amour <stamourv at racket-lang.org> 2012-02-25 17:37
> :
> | Add range to racket/list.
> :
>   M collects/racket/list.rkt                   |   14 +++++++++++++-
>   M collects/scribblings/reference/pairs.scrbl |   16 ++++++++++++++++
>   M collects/tests/racket/list.rktl            |   16 ++++++++++++++++

Is there really a need for an N+1 way to do this?
Did you check if there's any code that this breaks?

If it stays, then I'd prefer a version that is more directly
implemented in terms of `in-range' (let it determine defaults), and a
description that similarly builds directly on `in-range' (as the
comment in the code says).

          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!

Posted on the dev mailing list.