From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sjoerd_van_Leent_Priv=E9?= Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Immutable rnrs hashtable Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 10:44:41 +0100 Message-ID: <50B33A09.7090303@gmail.com> References: <50B2A31B.1070903@gmail.com> <87mwy5b1ej.fsf@Kagami.home> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.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 1353923064 19973 80.91.229.3 (26 Nov 2012 09:44:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 09:44:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: Ian Price Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 26 10:44:33 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TcvEu-00010N-Qv for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 10:44:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48519 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TcvEj-0000wU-98 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 04:44:21 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:56909) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TcvEh-0000wP-7P for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 04:44:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TcvEb-0004Pu-Fn for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 04:44:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-la0-f41.google.com ([209.85.215.41]:36362) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TcvEb-0004Pn-6k for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 04:44:13 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-la0-f41.google.com with SMTP id m15so7271302lah.0 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 01:44:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gCMvsUuZ75yKPZpwQXLgIuq+BYBMUbUiZ4BCRzqydtQ=; b=MLYjgSaUMNcJApZ1jqIuRWKWfYiNUXITrYXWRZkLj9nB4ztaxq5xxm7aUGj+pbs34L UquQ1NMk0B6HJpcrY1mRpC3R/HRArl6bK+Q9gPsqLsJuGPH6gNn5J+SHeZwCFx4b/clQ LWGdE5A8x6l/AL3ZYo2w6oIjGzgg3LLgE0peHGCugdpxNLdn/2HC/ng1SV/+eLPmca2H szFIs0RptoLXo0kOZsoZABrop1lmHf/zx65CWZzoO8j9IHb+onf7Gukcc30bcaGuBG3V fhgX8S+4+Q0RqtKrqz4z3BBMT57oPp4GM7R4bBNOUEptMCvvTP67lJJCioy8nAfSPJ7T vF6g== Original-Received: by 10.152.132.3 with SMTP id oq3mr10314997lab.18.1353923052109; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 01:44:12 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [172.16.3.14] (5352DA6A.cm-6-3d.dynamic.ziggo.nl. [83.82.218.106]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id jk8sm5088330lab.7.2012.11.26.01.44.10 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 26 Nov 2012 01:44:11 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121011 Thunderbird/16.0.1 In-Reply-To: <87mwy5b1ej.fsf@Kagami.home> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.215.41 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:15255 Archived-At: Hi Ian, The implementation is okay, I wrote a half baked example, as I understood the bit to be the mutable field. But it should act in reverse. Got it. In many cases, I use info-lookup-symbol in Guile's documentation, as it is much easier to navigate than the RNRS website (which I consider bad design, as there is no sensible hierarchy whatsoever or something of a decent index). This is why I got it wrong, as the documentation was mistaken, and I did the opposite of what I should be doing. And yes, I was using #t and #f, But I expected the results to be the other way around. Btw, isn't their a hashtable which is more pure in it's implementation? The RNRS and SRFI-69 versions are having quite some side-effects. I would have expected a method like "hashtable-add" which copies an existing hashtable, adds values and returns a new hashtable. I know, I prefer pure functional implementations... Sjoerd On 11/26/2012 02:25 AM, Ian Price wrote: > Whoops, in my haste, I forgot to note that this _is_ a bug in guile's > documentation, not in the implementation. Suggested fix included. > > Ludovic, Andy: > Should I add him to THANKS too? >