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

Re: #\a octothorpe syntax vs SRFI 10

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 58 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 58 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

bear wrote:
> Thus, our 5x4x3x2 array could be written
> #5*4*3*2A(...)
> or
> #5*4*3*2A<typespec>(...)
> or similar.

Yeah, I was thinking #5x4x3x2(...), but dropping the A poses some
problems with rank-0 arrays. (Per Bothner finally convinced me.)

There's a simple solution for PLT Scheme: Declare that boxed values are
equivalent to rank-0 arrays, just as SRFI 58 makes vectors equivalent to
rank-1 arrays. Then you can use the box literal syntax for rank-0
arrays. Kinda kludgy, but at least it sticks to prior art.
Bradd W. Szonye