Shiro Kawai wrote:
Aubrey Jaffer wrote:I think having SRFI-101 shadow R6RS identifiers is the most common way that SRFI-101 would be used.Is this true? Since srfi-101's data structure is incompatible to the built-in pairs, you can't pass srfi-101 list to the imported procedures that expects built-in list, and vice versa. (Or am I missing something?)
I don't think you're missing anything. Passing a random-access list to a procedure expecting a sequential list will not work.
If you import srfi-101 shadowing r6rs list primitives, you pretty much commit to live in srfi-101 world, isolated fromother libraries that deal with native lists. That's ok for experimental work, but for practical applications I'd rather imagine that it'd be more common to import srfi-101 procedures with prefix, and the user converts normal lists and srfi-101 lists as needed.
Agreed, I think this will be the more common usage.I would like to accommodate the other usage by providing a replacement (rnrs base) library---as a convenience only---that uses random-access pairs in place of traditional pairs. I am not entirely sure this can be done as an R6RS library, but I'm not entirely sure it can't either.
David