From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Panicz Maciej Godek Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: A couple of questions about goops method parameters Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 22:37:49 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1409905923.9245.5.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> <871trpridm.fsf@izanagi.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <87lhpxg6ta.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1409949488 26409 80.91.229.3 (5 Sep 2014 20:38:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 20:38:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Carlos Pita , David Thompson , "guile-user@gnu.org" To: "Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer" Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 05 22:38:01 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@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 1XQ0Ge-0001Ky-Kq for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2014 22:38:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60128 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XQ0Ge-0005ha-1U for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2014 16:38:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41203) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XQ0GV-0005hV-3n for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2014 16:37:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XQ0GU-00057y-4F for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2014 16:37:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-vc0-x229.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400c:c03::229]:55527) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XQ0GT-00057A-Vw for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2014 16:37:50 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-vc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id hq11so13157243vcb.0 for ; Fri, 05 Sep 2014 13:37:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=+IIkXE/qvFjXcoSssZDU+3v33TGuIWxPce+sgDNGqWc=; b=rVh27YAdvZaqCwOXy4HB5OKqYNHCW2XX/NqM4ubjkKdfj6ihFdIyoLFu1wzP2Gf/qX ThBa3JbbIMGfDOJIVi9SSI59Scltq8RAjWdMHUPshew5aLGFYxem0im0Pf55CwESq6no pg+1FxWGY+a8/10F8TgN1CydM6CPM03Ec0KYEdqEHk5dXYTXfqRd9eRbg43lJTfIkpuU Ex537HMilunT+d/hCewgA3hgKFFAszgyN8Zvk0wz8x5WpTpfMX4Ac1dkk87uK0FXJYlk cozyeOIgt8oX7/AWC7JhLU0G5rLt2kz8WRdgANaQunQp3Hkitc2SaKIcnyNSFKBom4Ob UE9g== X-Received: by 10.220.184.70 with SMTP id cj6mr12260153vcb.5.1409949469412; Fri, 05 Sep 2014 13:37:49 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.221.66.79 with HTTP; Fri, 5 Sep 2014 13:37:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87lhpxg6ta.fsf@taylan.uni.cx> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400c:c03::229 X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:11466 Archived-At: 2014-09-05 22:18 GMT+02:00 Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer : > Panicz Maciej Godek writes: > >> [...] I think that it is a big problem of Scheme, that it does not >> have any noncontroversial and commonly accepted way for creating named >> tuples. > > Does SRFI-9 not count because it creates tuple *types* and doesn't > support immediate creation of tuples of an "anonymous type"? (Could be > an interesting feature, though not sure how useful in the end.) Or do > you just not consider SRFI-9 to be commonly accepted? AFAIK it's pretty > widely implemented, and for the record(!) it's been standardized as a > part of R7RS-small. There are a few issues here. The fact that it is impossible to create anonymous type is one thing. Another is that each record type introduces accessor bindings to a global namespace. In case of Elm, one could write mario = { x = 0, y = 0, dx = 0, dy = 0 } and then access the fields with the dot notation, i.e. mario.x There are other representations (like basket list or assoc list) that avoid that problem, but they generate other ones -- namely, that the access times get linear, and in case of assoc lists there is a huge overhead of data, and in case of basket lists one needs to pass around additional information regarding the names of subsequent fields. And the sole fact that there are other reasonable represetations leads to the conclusion that none is commonly accepted. (Actually I think the nicest solution I've seen was in Erlang, but unfortunately it wouldn't go well with Scheme)