guile-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: sorted?


From: Maxime Devos
Subject: RE: sorted?
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 16:40:09 +0100

>On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 11:37:33AM +0000, Ricardo G. Herdt wrote:
>> Hi Jeremy,
>> 
>> Am 09.12.2024 11:21 schrieb Jeremy Korwin-Zmijowski:
>> > The reference says :
>> > 
>> >    Scheme Procedure: *sorted?* items less
>> >    C Function: *scm_sorted_p* (items, less)
>> > 
>> >        Return |#t| if items is a list or vector such that, for each
>> >        element x and the next element y of items, |(less y x)| returns
>> >        |#f|. Otherwise return |#f|.
>> > 
>> > I think the description should be :
>> > 
>> >    Return |#t| if items is a list or vector such that, for each element
>> >    x and the next element y of items, |(less y x)| returns |#t|.
>> >    Otherwise return |#f|.
>> 
>> Actually no, since less is applied to y and x in that order. This way
>> (sorted? '(1 1) <) correctly returns #t as your experiments show.
>I don't get it. (< 1 1) is /always/ #f, regardless of the order of the
ones?

Please read the description closely. (< 1 1) returns #false, so ‘sorted?’ 
returns #false according to the first description.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]