From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David De La Harpe Golden Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: hash-table-{to, from}-alist Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 05:46:32 +0000 Message-ID: <492CE2B8.7090201@harpegolden.net> References: <863aknitfg.fsf@lifelogs.com> <20080830051807.GB9625@tomas> <86bpwe9su5.fsf@lifelogs.com> <867i6z1jo5.fsf_-_@lifelogs.com> <86ej14vhvg.fsf@lifelogs.com> <20081122054510.GA28298@tomas> <873ahkkkt5.fsf@xemacs.org> <20081122152126.GA4142@tomas> <87vdufk6do.fsf@xemacs.org> <867i6tt4yz.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87bpw4k1z6.fsf@xemacs.org> <86bpw3d829.fsf@lifelogs.com> <86d4gjnz56.fsf@lifelogs.com> <492CB16D.3070507@harpegolden.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1227678422 25956 80.91.229.12 (26 Nov 2008 05:47:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 05:47:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Ted Zlatanov , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 26 06:48:04 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1L5DFo-0004ij-Nq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 06:48:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43210 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L5DEf-00081P-10 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:46:49 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L5DEZ-00081K-0g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:46:43 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L5DEX-00080p-Cz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:46:42 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50516 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L5DEX-00080d-6h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:46:41 -0500 Original-Received: from harpegolden.net ([65.99.215.13]:46893) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L5DET-0008OD-Ur for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:46:39 -0500 Original-Received: from [87.198.54.45] (87-198-54-45.ptr.magnet.ie [87.198.54.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "David De La Harpe Golden", Issuer "David De La Harpe Golden Personal CA rev 3" (verified OK)) by harpegolden.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C11268322; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 05:46:34 +0000 (GMT) User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20081018) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:106192 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier wrote: > So the question is should we use #s(...) as CL does, (That's definitely implementation-specific, just what clisp in particular does) > or #s<...> as XEmacs does. > N.B. It's actually #s(...) in XEmacs too, at least when variable print-readably is t. Otherwise the not-readable #<...> (no "s") is used, as per Stephen J. Turnbull's posts to this thread, also shown in [1] Since hashtables are typically used for largish numbers of keys, supporting such an XEmacs-like print-readably variable* and suppressing the output of key/value data (at least beyond a certain key count) for the non-readable #<...> case seems like it might be quite desirable, though I dunno if XEmacs actually does such suppression, CL implementations tend to (regarding xemacs compat it can't matter much since it's only the non-readable case). * itself similar to CL *print-readably*, though there's no guarantee a particular CL implementation can actually print its hashtables readably no matter how you twiddle that. Clisp does its thing. SBCL spits out a #. read-time evaluation lump that constructs a hashtable. Clozure CL (at least the outdated version on my system) signals a print-not-readable error... [2] [1] http://www.xemacs.org/Documentation/21.5/html/lispref_9.html#SEC67 [2] http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/v_pr_rda.htm