[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Open issues for SRFI 113
Alex Shinn scripsit:
> I think strong typing with unique objects is better here. They are
> less ambiguous, more efficient for many of the utilities, and as you
> say can be used to access the other members of the enum-set.
I grant these advantages, but the simplicity and convenience of symbols
are real advantages too. I'm trying to work out a design in which
either symbols or unique objects wrapping symbols can be used.
> A common pattern I use in Chibi for data structures is to have a
> base library with just the type predicate and -contains? utility,
> and constructors go in a separate library. Thus other libraries
> could provide APIs that allow sets as arguments for convenience,
> without themselves incurring any real load overhead.
I don't really understand this use case. If you accept sets as
arguments, what do you want to be able to do with them?
How they ever reached any conclusion at all <cowan@xxxxxxxx>
is starkly unknowable to the human mind. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
--"Backstage Lensman", Randall Garrett