[plt-scheme] likely -> incompatibility: hashtables

From: Jos Koot (jos.koot at telefonica.net)
Date: Mon Apr 7 18:50:31 EDT 2008

I always thought a relation was defined as a subset of the product of two 
(or even more) sets (not necessarily different ones, of course)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Graham Hughes" <graham at sigwinch.org>
To: <plt-scheme at list.cs.brown.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 12:14 AM
Subject: Re: [plt-scheme] likely -> incompatibility: 

> Matthew Flatt wrote:
>> While we're cleaning up the language in v4, we'd like to do something
>> about the API for using hash tables:
> <snip description>
> I don't have any particular problem with this; I have had need for
> side-effect free tables before but used galore.plt from PLaneT instead.
> However if you don't want to use "table" the noun (which, again, I have
> no quarrel) one could use "map" (could be confusing) or "relation" (less
> confusing, more verbose, also subtly wrong, as relations are more like A
> -> P(B) than A -> B).
> Graham
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme 

Posted on the users mailing list.