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

RE: Fundamental design flaws



Tom Lord wrote:
> I'm saying: either don't try to operate on the Scheme types at all, or
> design 44 in such a way that the collections procedures work on (at
> least):
>
> 	ordinary lists as sequences (with any equivalence predicate)
> 	ordinary lists as sets (with any equivalence predicate)
> 	ordinary lists as ordered sequences
>           (with any equivalence /ordering predicate)
> 	ordinary associative lists as dictionaries (with any
> equivalence predicate)
>
> (and probably other things I'm forgetting.)

Some adapters which take a Scheme type and return a collection could do
this, presumably within the bounds of the current 44 spec, although I
haven't tried to prove that to myself.  Would that approach satisfy you, or
do you think that the collection procedures should be able to operate
directly on "unwrapped" Scheme types?

Anton