It would be nice if (for-all ..) allowed for additional,
optional list arguments.
(for-all (fn (item) ...) list1 ... listn)
It may not always be efficient to use append to
concatenate the lists since the for-all may be in
a loop itself.
It would also be nice to have a disjunction complement to
for-all called for-any
(for-any cond list1 ... listn)
isn't 'for-any' what we have in 'exists' (at the moment for just one list)?
Or do you mean:
(or (for-all cnd list1) (for-all cnd list2) ...)
If not can you give a specific example for 'for-any'.
Lutz
I didn't see that before.
I remember spending days of pondering if to name this 'exists' or 'for-any'. 'for-any' connects better to 'for-all' but it seems that math/logicians and the Scheme standard R6RS spec prefer 'exists'.
Was do you think?
Lutz
my eye sight isn't the greatest any more.
I didn't see the hyperlink to exists in the manual
at the bottom of the example.