This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 66 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 66 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
Michael Sperber wrote:
Yes, that makes sense. However, aren't you really arguing for Taylor's idea of having a single type for "blobs" and then having access methods for various sequences of bits inside them?
It might be nice - but I haven't seen a specific proposal. For byte and other uniform vectors random acces is useful. E.g. floating-point matrix operations. For parsing a complicated "blob" (either in memory, on disk, or a network stream) you normally want sequential access, and being able to mix data types: e.g. a u32 count whose value is N is followed by N instances of u8, followed by a u64 checksum. > (I have to
admit that I'm warming increasingly to this idea.) Otherwise, the concept is going to bloat every API that deals with similar objects beyond recognition. This way, most of the bloat would be right with the "blob API" and stay there. What do you think?
The devil is in the details ... -- --Per Bothner per@xxxxxxxxxxx http://per.bothner.com/