[racket] arity of + versus <=

From: Joe Marshall (jmarshall at alum.mit.edu)
Date: Fri Oct 28 13:23:35 EDT 2011

On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Carl Eastlund <cce at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> "Joe Marshall picked the wrong way to generalize <=" is not a reason,
> historical or otherwise, for <= not being generalized to 0 or 1
> arguments.

Certainly not, but it carries the same weight as "Carl Eastlund claims Joe's
generalization is wrong."

On the other hand, providing code to demonstrate a particular way
of generalizing may carry more weight than a simple assertion of
incorrectness.  But I could be wrong here as well.


Posted on the users mailing list.