Re: [Chicken-hackers] Thrush operator

[Moritz Heidkamp]

Hi Jörg,

Jörg F. Wittenberger <address@hidden> writes:
> I rather loved to think instead of "inserting the (*single*)
> value of the expression into the next expression" of something
> along the lines of physical wires:
> connect (pass) all the result(s) of the first expression into the next
> (which would then need to accept as many values as the stage
> before returns.

if I understand you correctly, this is exactly what the starred
versions, `->*' and `->>*', do. Or did I get you wrong?

Peter had another idea worth considering: using placeholders like `cut'
and `cute' do:

  (-> "world"
      (list "hello" <>)
      (string-intersperse <> ",")
      (print <> "."))

As this silly example demonstrates this could be used to "wire" values
into arbitrary argument positions. It's a bit more flexible and it may
be clearer what's going on but also adds some line noise. I have to
think about that!


Moritz