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

Re: record-mutator vs record-modifier

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 76 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 76 are here. Eventually, the entire history will be moved there, including any new messages.



Per Bothner <per@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Many of the names of the procedural layer match those of
> the "record" feature in SLIB, which I believe is based on
> Pavel Curtis  1989 proposal.
>
> (Some of these functions are different, but I believe an
> implementation could overload both the old and the new specifications.)
>
> However, SRFI-76 uses record-mutator where SLIB uses record-modifier.
> Is there any reason for the for this difference?  I think that the
> old name is better than the new name, so why change it? 

I think the main reason is to be consistent with the wording "mutable"
and "immutable" in the syntactic layer, which don't have good (for
some measure of "good") counterparts on the "modifier" side of the
fence.

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