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

Re: Fundamental design flaws



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).

	Scott

Attachment: pgpJeinGAyslJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature