From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc)
Cc: guile-user@gnu.org, rm@fabula.de, guile-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: overriding car/cdr
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 15:56:09 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3wu6x47eo.fsf@multivac.cwru.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87znbtbfzt.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> (Marius Vollmer's message of "Sun, 08 Feb 2004 19:09:10 +0100")
Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.de> wrote:
> But car/cdr are not a good way to work with general sequences. Think
> of vectors.
car/cdr certainly can be made to work with vectors. Making them work
with arbitrary user-defined structures would give us a lot of
flexibility without too much work.
If there is a significant amount of C code using SCM_CAR/SCM_CDR with
non-pair objects, then it might be best to leave them unchanged. But
I think the Scheme-level cxr functions would be a good place to make
the change.
> We should not try hard to turn car/cdr into something abstract
> (which they are not, even their names come from the lowest level).
Of course they currently are not, but that doesn't (nor do the names)
tell us whether it would be good if they were more abstract.
> Somehthing like the 'sequence' concept of Common Lisp is a better
> approach, I'd say.
AFAICT, that would involve a whole new set of procedures to work with
this new data type. I'm suggesting modifying the existing procedures
so that most existing code would automatically be able to take
advantage of the new flexibility, with no further changes needed.
paul
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-02-08 20:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-16 9:41 Worrying development Roland Orre
2004-01-16 11:59 ` tomas
2004-01-18 21:05 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-01-18 21:58 ` Tom Lord
2004-01-22 21:47 ` Tom Lord
2004-01-22 16:11 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-01-22 18:42 ` Tom Lord
2004-01-23 11:45 ` Dirk Herrmann
2004-01-23 17:16 ` Tom Lord
2004-01-23 21:01 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-01-23 22:18 ` Tom Lord
2004-01-24 0:27 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-01-24 0:53 ` Tom Lord
2004-01-23 22:28 ` Paul Jarc
2004-01-24 12:09 ` rm
2004-01-24 13:29 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-01-26 2:42 ` overriding car/cdr (was: Worrying development) Paul Jarc
2004-02-08 16:21 ` overriding car/cdr Dirk Herrmann
2004-02-08 18:09 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-02-08 20:56 ` Paul Jarc [this message]
2004-03-20 22:28 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-03-22 17:05 ` David Van Horn
2004-03-22 21:03 ` Marius Vollmer
2004-03-22 17:24 ` Paul Jarc
2004-01-23 22:37 ` Worrying development Dirk Herrmann
2004-01-23 23:25 ` Tom Lord
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=m3wu6x47eo.fsf@multivac.cwru.edu \
--to=prj@po.cwru.edu \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=guile-user@gnu.org \
--cc=rm@fabula.de \
/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).