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

Re: Should we MAY a "curly-write" and "neoteric-write"? Or even "sweet-write"?

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 110 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 110 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

John Cowan:
> I'd say forget sweet-write and go with curly-write and neoteric-write,
> and go ahead and use MUST modals for them, without overspecifying
> what they output.  R7RS systems MUST provide curly-write{simple,shared}
> and neoteric-write-{simple,shared} as well.
> As long as there is a good reference implementation, there is no reason
> not to require these things.

Okay.  A write-simple is, well, simple; I'll start there and see what people think.

Is there a a simple example of an efficient R7RS "write" and "write-shared" implementation?  The "obvious" solution involves hash tables (which are not portable), & I fear there's some corner case or clever simplification I won't realize.

--- David A. Wheeler