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.
Bradd W. Szonye wrote: > >> How do the generic procedures know whether '((a . 1) (b . 2)) is a > >> list or an alist? If it's based on content, you have isomorphism > >> issues to resolve. If you're now using something like a record type > >> for alists, then you're not really handling primitive alists. > > scgmille@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > They never receive ((a . 1) (b . 2)). They receive an alist-dict, > > which has structure beyond the stored values which it can dispatch on > > (Taylor can comment more). We don't handle primitive alists. > > You make a big deal about how important it is to provide generic > procedures for collections, but you don't support a very common > collection type? Code that uses alists must choose between a complete > port or no support? An adapter could be implemented, with type (alist -> collection).