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

Re: Fundamental design flaws

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 Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 12:06:42PM -0800, Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
> No, the second list contains the values =?, (a . b), and (c . d). One
> procedure and two pairs. However, because the second list happens to
> match the implementation of a SRFI-44 alist, the generic collection
> function thinks it is one.
> Depending on what you're trying to do, that's either a feature or a
> major flaw. Fans of prototype-based OO may like the fact that the system
> correctly detects "value-based" subtypes like this. People who really
> want a (proc, pair, pair) tuple will probably be surprised, though.

Right, the same problem he elaborated on later.  Yes, thats a very real 
bug.  But is largely a bug in the reference implementation.  We just 
need to make it clear that alist (or alist-dict) is a dictionary 
implemented as an association list (but represented probably as an alist 
+ something else to keep it type distinct).


Attachment: pgpJeinGAyslJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature