newlispfanclub.alh.net

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:
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.