[racket-dev] `take' argument order

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
> About a minute ago, Robby Findler wrote:
>> Just on general principle, I think that making take in lazy match
>> take in regular racket is more important than matching Haskell, but
>> I don't really have a firm enough grasp on the details to have a
>> strong opinion either way on the below.
>
> [Yes, that's true regardless.  If `take' in plain `racket' stays as
> is, then eventually the one in lazy will need to change.  It just
> happened to be the first thing that made me look at the order more
> closely, and discover thet other issues.  As another point, the
> justification for the argument order in Haskell is not laziness but
> its implicit currying -- so of course it shouldn't be a reason to make
> lazy racket follow it.]

So, part of the discussion is changing the argument order for strict
Racket's take?

That seems difficult, for backward compatibility reasons.

Robby