[m-rev.] for review: improve support for folds over sets in stdlib

[Peter Wang]

On 2010-11-09, Julien Fischer <juliensf at csse.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2010, Peter Wang wrote:
> 
> >On 2010-11-08, Julien Fischer <juliensf at csse.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
> >>
> >>For review by anyone.
> >>
> >>Support folds over sets with up to five accumulators in all the standard
> >>library modules that provide sets.
> >>
> >>Support mostly-unique and unique accumulators in set folds.
> >>(These were provided in some set modules, but not in others.)
> >>
> >>library/set.m:
> >>library/set_bbbtree.m:
> >>library/set_ctree234.m:
> >>library/set_ordlist.m:
> >>library/set_tree234.m:
> >>library/set_unordlist.m:
> >>	Add predicates for fold over sets with up to five accumulators.
> >>
> >>	As per the coding standard, where an operation has both a
> >>	function version and a predicate version, the declaration for
> >>	the function version should occur first in stdlib modules.
> >
> >I wonder why that is.
> 
> Why the coding standard says that?

Yes.

Peter
People's Revolutionary Front for the Liberation of Predicate Forms (PRFLPF)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-reviews mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-reviews at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-reviews at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-reviews-request at csse.unimelb.edu.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------