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

Re: external representation

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 76 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 76 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005, Michael Sperber wrote:

>> An external representation would be tricky to construct for instances of
>> generative record types, but for non-generative types it should be
>> possible, and would certainly be useful.
>Yes, and I expect this will be an addition at some point in the
>future.  (Non-generativity is partly there for exactly that purpose.)
>For this SRFI, we decided to punt on this, though, because of the
>expected technical complexity.

I think there's a legitimate expectation and widespread implementation
of the idea that a scheme implementing simple records (aggregates)
ought to be able to read and write them in an external syntax.  And
while I'd like to see that _functionality_ documented, promoted, or
possibly standardized, I don't think there's any consensus yet for any
_particular_ external syntax.