|Subject:||Re: [Chicken-hackers] Proposal / patch for fixing #1385 (swapped bit-set? argument order)|
|Date:||Tue, 8 Aug 2017 16:15:48 -0400|
Renaming it to a completely nonstandard name should make it easy to port,
and later on (CHICKEN 5.1 or even 5.2) we can re-introduce the bit-set?
procedure with the correct argument order, and deprecate the new procedure.
The name of the nonstandard procedure is not very relevant since it is
going to disappear anyway, but I think bit->boolean is a relatively clean
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|