[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: loss of abstraction
Andrew Wilcox <awilcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> But let me ask. Suppose you are using a typical Scheme implementation
> in which CAR and CDR operate only on plain pairs. You are then
> constrained to implement compound syntax objects as lists. You have
> lost the ability to use some other abstraction. As a practical
> matter, what impact does that have on you? What would you like to be
> able to do with a syntax object abstraction that you'd not be able to
> do if you've lost that abstraction?
Change its representation.
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla