From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement SRFI-111 Boxes Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:21:31 +0100 Message-ID: <87ior281x0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87a9elkjmo.fsf@netris.org> <87txctzpjy.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> <874n4tlka7.fsf@gnu.org> <87k3bjtevu.fsf@pobox.com> <87vbv2i55a.fsf@gnu.org> <87zjkeqdc5.fsf@pobox.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1395779305 23558 80.91.229.3 (25 Mar 2014 20:28:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 20:28:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: Andy Wingo Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 25 21:28:33 2014 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 1WSXxW-000701-30 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:28:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44113 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSXxV-0004aW-FC for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:28:29 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46965) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSXqt-0005hm-7F for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:21:43 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSXqo-0000sN-AJ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:21:39 -0400 Original-Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([2a01:474::1]:47730) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WSXqo-0000rw-2S for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 16:21:34 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD8DB1FCE; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:21:32 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hera.aquilenet.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H4HMcTEVlL2F; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:21:32 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from pluto (reverse-83.fdn.fr [80.67.176.83]) by hera.aquilenet.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 788A911D9; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:21:32 +0100 (CET) X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 5 Germinal an 222 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 83C4 F8E5 10A3 3B4C 5BEA D15D 77DD 95E2 EA52 ECF4 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: <87zjkeqdc5.fsf@pobox.com> (Andy Wingo's message of "Tue, 25 Mar 2014 20:37:30 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.130007 (Ma Gnus v0.7) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a01:474::1 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:17013 Archived-At: Andy Wingo skribis: > On Tue 25 Mar 2014 18:01, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > >> Tu put it differently, I don=E2=80=99t 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.=20=20 > >> However, it could perhaps break code > > In what way? =E2=80=98variable?=E2=80=99 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: #> vs. #> 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=E2=80=99t feel strongly about this particular point, but I th= ink we=E2=80=99ve been deprecating a lot lately. Ludo=E2=80=99.