On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 12:03:09PM -0800, Bradd W. Szonye wrote: > > Bradd W. Szonye wrote: > >> A programmer cannot implement a new collection type without knowing > >> the details of the dispatch method .... > > scgmille@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > I agree. Thats why this is mentioned in the issues. But thats a > > 'solve once' problem for the implementer. > > It's a "must be solved" problem for everyone who implements the core of > SRFI-44 *and* for everyone who wants to add a new collection to the > system. Yes, but its not that hard. They can integrate with Tiny-CLOS if the SRFI-44 implementation they're using isn't using a more native feature of the Scheme system, or that system otherwise. Adding the collection to whatever dispatch mechanism is being used is pretty trivial compared to actually implementing the collection. > >> Between R5RS, SRFI-1, SRFI-13, and a little glue code, a programmer > >> can actually do *better* than he can with SRFI-44. > > > Yes, but not for future collections. > > SRFI-44 doesn't let him do better for future collections, because it > doesn't specify how to add new collections to the existing set. And it can't until a dispatch mechanism is standardized and everywhere, but its not as bad as you make it sound. Scott
Attachment:
pgpX8JWRZkw68.pgp
Description: PGP signature