This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 118 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 118 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
Shiro Kawai scripsit: > There can be other choices, but I suggest that a portable code > shouldn't count on that mutating operations is any more efficient > than immutable solutions. True. Indeed, in plain Chicken, mutation is cheap but change of size would be very expensive, since there is no indirection. Chicken with the UTF-8 egg in fact requires garbage collection when mutation involves increasing the length in bytes, as a new object has to be allocated and then all existing pointers must be fixed up. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@xxxxxxxx The competent programmer is fully aware of the strictly limited size of his own skull; therefore he approaches the programming task in full humility, and among other things he avoids clever tricks like the plague. --Edsger Dijkstra