From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement SRFI-111 Boxes
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:21:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ior281x0.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87zjkeqdc5.fsf@pobox.com> (Andy Wingo's message of "Tue, 25 Mar 2014 20:37:30 +0100")
Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> skribis:
> On Tue 25 Mar 2014 18:01, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> Tu put it differently, I don’t think it would buy us anything to make
>> variable SRFI-111 boxes.
>
> Dunno; variables are slightly cheaper than records. Their type checks
> are easier and they take less memory.
>
>> However, it could perhaps break code
>
> In what way?
‘variable?’ would suddenly match any SRFI-111 box.
>> and would not allow for a separate type printer, which is useful.
>
> Not sure what this point is, as the external representation was not
> specified in SRFI-111.
I mean this:
#<variable 15cb830 value: #<procedure + (#:optional _ _ . _)>>
vs.
#<box 206f8c0 value: #<procedure + (#:optional _ _ . _)>>
I find it convenient that variables are distinguished.
> Perhaps we are miscommunicating -- I would change what we currently call
> "variables" to be "boxes". WDYT?
You mean just the name, or making them SRFI-111 boxes?
Anyway, I don’t feel strongly about this particular point, but I think
we’ve been deprecating a lot lately.
Ludo’.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-25 20:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-24 5:56 [PATCH] Implement SRFI-111 Boxes Mark H Weaver
2014-01-24 9:39 ` Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer
2014-01-24 10:57 ` Ludovic Courtès
2014-03-24 22:23 ` Andy Wingo
2014-03-25 17:01 ` Ludovic Courtès
2014-03-25 19:37 ` Andy Wingo
2014-03-25 20:21 ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]
2014-03-25 20:31 ` Andy Wingo
2014-03-25 21:18 ` Ludovic Courtès
2014-01-24 10:55 ` Ludovic Courtès
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87ior281x0.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=wingo@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).