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


This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 43 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 43 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

I came across this srfi a couple of days ago, which is great since it
means I don't have to waste any more time with my own (very small)
srfi-1 like vector library.  Big thanks to Taylor and all the others
that have contributed so far.

It would be _great_ IMHO, if this library was not restricted to r5rs
vectors, but also applied to all objects that have (r5rs)vector-like
properties, i.e. integer indexed objects starting at 0 with O(1)
retrieval & update.  The reason is that we /already/ have srfi-4 with
its {f32,f64,...}vectors that offer exactly the same interface, and it
will be a nuisance if someone has to rewrite srfi-34 operations for
these types.

So how can it be done?  One way is to use, say, vec-ref, vec-set!,
vec-length, vec? generic functions that accept any (r5rs)vector-like
object and have different constructors for each one of them (exactly
as it is now -- make-vector, make-f32vector etc).  If a srfi-34
function doesn't (directly or indirectly) construct a new vector it
can operate solely in terms of vec-ref etc. without caring about the
specific type of vector it is applied to.  If, OTOH, a srfi-34
function _does_ construct a vector, or calls another function that
constructs one, its definition can be changed from:

(foo v arg1 arg2 ...), to:

(foo konstr) -> (lambda (v arg1 arg2 ...)),

where konstr is a constructor with the same interface with
make-vector, i.e. make-f32vector, make-bazvector etc.

This of course raises the question of how these generic vec-foo
operations are defined.  This could be left unspecified.  A scheme
system that supports srfi-4 for example could implement it very simply

(define (vec-length x)
    ((vector? x) (vector-length x))
    ((f32vector? x) (f32vector-length x))
    (... ...)
    (else (error "VEC-LENGTH: no applicable method."))))

A system supports some kind of clos-like system can even let the user
define his own methods and extend the system.

I came across this when, after implementing an interface to fortran
vectors, I realized that I don't want to maintain two different
versions of my vector library; one for r5rs and one for foreign
vectors.  I changed my library accordingly and I find it quite

I am pretty sure that I either have obviously overlooked something
crucial or there is an easier solution to this.  In both cases, I
would be glad if someone responds and corrects me.