[racket] Feature request: multiple keys in sort

From: Robby Findler (robby at eecs.northwestern.edu)
Date: Mon Jun 11 14:23:17 EDT 2012

On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
> So the bottom line is that there's no need to extend `sort' for this
> kind of functionality.  What would be nice to have though, is such a
> comparison combinator -- and the only reason there's nothing that
> comes pre-packaged is that I didn't see something that sticks out as
> the right api for it.  (See srfi-67 for a very complete discussion,
> and a post that I'll send to the dev list soon.)

I'm not sure I buy this conclusion here: the reason to put it into
sort (or somewhere) would be a) convenience and b) maintainability
(since this comes up fairly often at least in my own experience and
having something short to read to know what is going on is preferable
to having to read a bunch of code to figure out what is going on). No?


Posted on the users mailing list.