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

Re: Reasons for withdrawal



On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 09:25:01PM -0800, Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
> Bear wrote:
> >> The "implementation" provided with this SRFI adds no capabilities to
> >> any scheme system that drops it in and uses it ....
> 
> scgmille@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > This is flat wrong.  It allows one to consistently interchange values
> > between the standard Scheme types ....
> 
> Last I checked, R5RS already provides that. You have heard of
> vector->list et al, right?

Yes, but you cannot do it generically.  I cannot use collection->list to 
convert any of the compound structures to lists, or use enumeration to 
convert any compound structure to any other.

> 
> Really? Lists and alists already use a common enumerator. It's called
> "map." If you really need to deal with vectors and strings too, it's
> trivial to roll your own enumerator. Your enumerator doesn't even
> provide the multiple-collection capabilities of map and SRFI-1 fold --
> it's actually less capable than existing facilities.

SRFI-1 fold applies only to lists.  But thanks for admiting that 
enumeration over vectors and strings would be useful.  

> 
> Yes, that's very disappointing. That too damages the SRFI process in my
> opinion -- what's the point in publishing requirements if you're not
> going to follow them? Then again, maybe I misunderstood the editor's
> reply; much of it was difficult for me to follow.

Oh well, take it to srfi-discuss if you have further concerns.

	Scott

Attachment: pgpqkUXfx3dns.pgp
Description: PGP signature