Jacqueline Firth

Would just serializing it work? Or do you specifically want something human-readable.

Making the built-in Rebellion types like `option` and `result` serializable (as long as their contents are) sounds like a good idea to me. Same for the collections, like multisets and...

My first instinct would be to reach for `transduce`, `in-hash-entries`, and a reducer for whichever type of hash I was copying. Would that work for your use case?

Open questions: 1. Why? I had the idea while thinking about #347 and how an infinitely-emitting subtransducer would starve other transducers of the chance to consume items. This doesn't really...

I came up with an actual use case for this: using a transducer to perform an **in-place** transformation of a **mutable** sequence, such as a resizable vector. Example: ```racket (define...

Yes, definitely. Eventually I want to offer a transducer-based alternative for all of the use cases of `add-between`, including the various keyword arguments it has. Will probably be multiple issues...

No, but good use cases could change my mind. In my experience, an immutable record/tuple/struct/etc. containing [boxes][boxes] for the mutable fields is an effective approach, if a little clunky at...

Style rules inspired by #292: - No trailing whitespace - Newline at the end of each file

Scribble style rules related to DrRacket's auto-indentation: - Use parens instead of brackets with `examples`, e.g. `@(examples (foo) (bar) (baz))` instead of `@examples[(foo) (bar) (baz)]`. - Use double brackets with...

> On the other hand, it has a property that may be surprising: If one transducer begins to emit an infinite list, the other is never visited again. This seems...