[racket] arity of + versus <=

40 minutes ago, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> I would expect
> 
> (not (and (apply < x) (apply > x)))
> 
> to be true for all x

This, and many other points, were all part of a pretty big thread on
the R6RS list a while ago.

  http://lists.r6rs.org/pipermail/r6rs-discuss/2008-October/003566.html

Since so much verbiage was used then, it would be useful to go over
it in this context too.

-- 
          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!