[racket] question about foldl implementation

I privately +1ed Joe, and I all supportive of introducing new folds and phasing out the old ones. 


On Aug 13, 2010, at 4:04 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Joe Marshall <jmarshall at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> It seems to me that the Haskell version is better.
> 
> The Haskell ordering also has the advantage of fitting with the Typed
> Racket type system for variable-arity functions.
> -- 
> sam th
> samth at ccs.neu.edu
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users