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

Re: Efficiency of generic programming

To: Andre van Tonder <andre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Efficiency of generic programming
From: Michael Sperber <sperber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:36:24 +0200
Cc: srfi-76@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: srfi-76@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.4.60.0510070939420.4277@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Andre van Tonder's message of "Fri, 7 Oct 2005 10:27:25 -0400 (EDT)")
References: <Pine.GSO.4.60.0510061450450.2769@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <y9lbr2197f1.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.GSO.4.60.0510070939420.4277@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) XEmacs/21.5-b21 (darwin)

Andre van Tonder <andre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Again, I am not suggesting adding functional update [...]

Yet you are making a compelling case for it.  What's less clear to me
is why you seem to insist this should be done through the reflection
API (and thus be limited to non-opaque record types, among other
limitations)---after all, accessors, mutators, and constructors aren't
either.

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Efficiency of generic programming
  - From: Andre van Tonder

References:
- Efficiency of generic programming
  - From: Andre van Tonder
- Re: Efficiency of generic programming
  - From: Michael Sperber
- Re: Efficiency of generic programming
  - From: Andre van Tonder

Prev by Date: Re: external representation
Next by Date: Re: Efficiency of generic programming
Previous by thread: Re: Efficiency of generic programming
Next by thread: Re: Efficiency of generic programming
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread