This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 44 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 44 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 11:04:15AM -0800, bear wrote: > It argues for the implementation of those operations *EVEN ON > DICTIONARIES WHERE THEY'RE NOT PARTICULARLY EFFICIENT*. That > was, in fact, my whole point. Only if the operations exist on > all dictionaries will they be used in "generic" code. Only if > they are used in "generic" code will the benefits, where available, > be realized in general systems. I see your point entirely. My main argument is against operations that don't make any sense for some collections. For ones which do generalize but are implementable in terms of the more basic operations, there is little point *except* efficiency. In that case, the operators should be defined over a superset of collections where they're both defined and can be implemented more efficiently. For the general classes of SRFI, neither point holds. Scott
Description: PGP signature