[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Proposal: conversion functions

To: David Van Horn <dvanhorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Proposal: conversion functions
From: Taylor R Campbell <campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 17:18:53 -0400
Cc: srfi-101@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: srfi-101@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4AB3F71C.2010901@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (dvanhorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
User-agent: IMAIL/1.21; Edwin/3.116; MIT-Scheme/7.7.90.+

   Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 17:09:48 -0400
   From: David Van Horn <dvanhorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

   Here is a proposal for converting between representation of pairs and 
   lists.

I think the names PAIR->PAIR and LIST->LIST are very confusing.  Also,
both directions are necessary.  How about using more descriptive, if
more verbose names, such as SEQUENTIAL-LIST->RANDOM-ACCESS-LIST or
LINEAR-LIST->RANDOM-ACCESS-LIST?  Also, are the pair-only operations
useful?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Proposal: conversion functions
  - From: David Van Horn

References:
- Proposal: conversion functions
  - From: David Van Horn

Prev by Date: Proposal: conversion functions
Next by Date: Re: Proposal: conversion functions
Previous by thread: Proposal: conversion functions
Next by thread: Re: Proposal: conversion functions
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread