|
make-queue-with-list and make-queue-with-first-last Takashi Kato (04 Dec 2014 19:37 UTC)
|
|
Re: make-queue-with-list and make-queue-with-first-last
Shiro Kawai
(04 Dec 2014 20:15 UTC)
|
|
Re: make-queue-with-list and make-queue-with-first-last
John Cowan
(05 Dec 2014 12:39 UTC)
|
|
Re: make-queue-with-list and make-queue-with-first-last
John Cowan
(05 Dec 2014 12:36 UTC)
|
|
Re: make-queue-with-list and make-queue-with-first-last
Kevin Wortman
(05 Dec 2014 20:43 UTC)
|
|
New release of SRFI 117
John Cowan
(06 Dec 2014 02:00 UTC)
|
|
Re: New release of SRFI 117
Takashi Kato
(06 Dec 2014 09:27 UTC)
|
|
Re: New release of SRFI 117
John Cowan
(06 Dec 2014 17:27 UTC)
|
|
Re: New release of SRFI 117
Kevin Wortman
(06 Dec 2014 22:39 UTC)
|
|
Re: New release of SRFI 117
John Cowan
(06 Dec 2014 22:52 UTC)
|
make-queue-with-list and make-queue-with-first-last Takashi Kato 04 Dec 2014 19:37 UTC
Hi, I'm wondering why these 2 procedures are separated. Since an list argument can be also first pair of the list, I think the `make-queue-with-list` procedure can be like this: (make-queue-with-list first [last]) Beside this, the description of `make-queue-with-list` seems forcing implementations to use a list as its storage. I think this is a bit over specifying. For example, Sagittarius also has queue library and it's implemented with deque which doesn't use a list as its storage. Thus it's impossible to build this SRFI on top of the library. Because of this, it is also impossible to satisfy O(1) required by `make-queue-with-first-last`. -- _/_/ Takashi Kato E-mail: xxxxxx@ymail.com