12:48 <msiism> I've written a small variadic function demo for my notes and have two questions about it: 1. Is there a better way to do what I'm doing, using a variadic function? 2. Isn't it generally better to pass a data structure, e.g., a list in such a case?

12:48 <msiism> The code is at https://www.msiism.org/pb/SmyFM8/lt.html

16:54 <priime> msiism: This seems like somewhat of a contrived example, so to answer 2., yes, it would be better to just pass in a list. Then, the signature of your add1 function would be List -> List. Perhaps you need a different example for a variadic function?

18:42 <msiism> I was just meaning to demonstrate how taking any number of arguments would work, for my personal reference. The function wasn't meant to accomplish anything particularly meaningful.

18:42 <msiism> So, I'm sure there are better examples.

18:43 <msiism> I mean `+` is itself a variadic function, isn't it?

18:43 <msiism> And it would be a bit of a nuisance to always have to pass it a list of arguments instead of just the arguments.

19:03 <bremner> msiism: plus has a different signature than your function though

19:04 <bremner> msiism: your function looks like (lambda (lst) (map add1 lst))

19:04 <msiism> I see.

19:05 <msiism> And `+` always returns number, as it seems.

19:05 <msiism> Well, yeah, the signature says so.

19:06 <bremner> maybe an interesting example to impliment would be (List a b c ...) that does the same as (list a b c ...) using cons and recursion

19:09 <bremner> or for/fold for a higher level tool

19:10 <msiism> Okay, that makes sense.

22:37 <spdegabrielle> (fifteenth RacketCon) October 4-5, 2025, UMass Boston https://con.racket-lang.org [To register, buy a ticket via Eventbrite](https://www.eventbrite.com/e/racketcon-2025-tickets-1578775272339). If you cannot attend in-person, there is an option to help support the livestream for remote participants.