beneroth changed the topic of #picolisp to: PicoLisp language | The scalpel of software development | Channel Log: https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/picolisp | Check www.picolisp.com for more information
user3456 has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
user3456 has joined #picolisp
abu[7] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
abu[7] has joined #picolisp
rob_w has joined #picolisp
cpli has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
payphone has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
casaca has quit [Write error: Broken pipe]
<abu[7]> ii
abu[7] has left #picolisp [#picolisp]
abu[7] has joined #picolisp
cpli has joined #picolisp
payphone has joined #picolisp
casaca has joined #picolisp
rob_w has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rob_w has joined #picolisp
abu[7] has left #picolisp [#picolisp]
abu[7] has joined #picolisp
rob_w has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<beneroth> abu[7], when is +Hook used with +Joint ?
<beneroth> I refer to the doc saying "Prefix class for +relations, typically +Link or +Joint.", either I have a blackout or I don't see much sense in using +Hook prefix on a +Joint relation. Ofc it allows hooked indexing for other relations, but... hm.. I'm unsure
<beneroth> also abu[7], when did +Hook2 come in? must have missed it, that is a great change!
<beneroth> though I think in the +Hook2 example in the reference the order of relation class arguments is wrong
<abu[7]> I think +Hook2 is quite old
<abu[7]> I indeed have use cases for (+Hook +Joint)
<abu[7]> +Hook +Joint is more often though