This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 25 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 25 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
Radey Shouman writes: > That is not the situation that I had in mind. In SCM, for example, > all vectors are arrays, but some arrays are not vectors, in ... > The only cost is that disjointness cannot be guaranteed between > arrays and vectors -- and I'm not sure why it is even particularly > desireable. I've been thinking of this. I begin, slowly, to see that (1) there really is essentially no runtime cost for arrays, and (2) that R5RS vectors need not be redefined at all. So it seems like a win. Now, sharing a vector, or an array that shares a vector, can in some cases produce an array that essentially is that vector. Should we specify that the result of share-array is never a vector, or is a vector when it can be, or leave it unspecified? -- Jussi