mu - Soul of a tiny new machine. More thorough tests → More comprehensible and rewrite-friendly software → More resilient society.

	Commit message (Collapse)	Author	Age	Files	Lines
*	2620	Kartik K. Agaram	2016-01-30	1	-6/+6
\| \| \| \| \|	I was finding it hard to wrap around the directionality of calls with 'lhs' and 'rhs'. Seems to work better with 'to' and 'from'. Let's see.
*	2614	Kartik K. Agaram	2016-01-29	1	-1/+1
\|
*	2570 - recipe variables are now fully type-checked	Kartik K. Agaram	2016-01-18	1	-0/+31
\|
*	2569	Kartik K. Agaram	2016-01-18	1	-0/+14
\|
*	2566 - typecheck 'call' on recipe variables	Kartik K. Agaram	2016-01-18	1	-1/+25
\|
*	2565 - typecheck 'call' on literal recipes	Kartik K. Agaram	2016-01-18	1	-0/+48
\|
*	2563 - bring back 'call'	Kartik K. Agaram	2016-01-18	1	-0/+54
\| \| \| \|	Still need to type-check it, though.
*	2562	Kartik K. Agaram	2016-01-17	1	-11/+12
\| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \|	We want to use the type 'recipe' for recipe variables, because it seems nicer to say `recipe number -> number` rather than recipe-ordinal, etc. To support this we'll allow recipe names to be mentioned without any type. This might make a couple of places in this commit more brittle. I'm dropping error messages, causing them to not happen in some situations. Maybe I should just bite the bullet and require an explicit :recipe-literal. We'll see.
*	2561	Kartik K. Agaram	2016-01-17	1	-0/+25
	Reorganize layers in preparation for a better, more type-safe implementation of first-class and higher-order recipes.