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

Re: octothorpe array syntax; other comments

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 47 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 47 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 08:43:57PM -0800, bear wrote:
> I think I agree that we shouldn't need new octothorpe constructs for
> arrays:  In fact, the vectors-of-vectors-of-vectors... syntax should
> work just fine for them .... should work fine for a 2-dimensional
> array. And if you think it really has to store type information and/or
> be disjoint from one-dimensional vectors, I'd agree with Mr. Campbell
> that #,((array-of <type-expr>) ...) or ... #,(array ...) is a better
> notation .... No need to mention rank and size; those are implicitly
> given by the structure.

Agreed on all points.
Bradd W. Szonye