Terminology: fixed-array => eager-array?
Bradley Lucier
(05 Aug 2015 00:55 UTC)
|
Re: Terminology: fixed-array => eager-array?
Jamison Hope
(05 Aug 2015 14:33 UTC)
|
Re: Terminology: fixed-array => eager-array?
John Cowan
(05 Aug 2015 17:46 UTC)
|
Re: Terminology: fixed-array => eager-array?
Bradley Lucier
(17 Aug 2015 19:25 UTC)
|
Re: Terminology: fixed-array => eager-array?
John Cowan
(25 Aug 2015 12:37 UTC)
|
Re: Terminology: fixed-array => eager-array?
Jamison Hope
(25 Aug 2015 15:29 UTC)
|
Re: Terminology: fixed-array => eager-array? Bradley Lucier (31 Aug 2015 00:26 UTC)
|
Laziness (was: Terminology)
John Cowan
(05 Aug 2015 16:55 UTC)
|
Re: Terminology: fixed-array => eager-array? Bradley Lucier 31 Aug 2015 00:26 UTC
On 08/25/2015 11:29 AM, Jamison Hope wrote: > On Aug 25, 2015, at 8:37 AM, John Cowan <xxxxxx@mercury.ccil.org> wrote: > >> Bradley Lucier scripsit: >> >>> I'm leaning towards "simple-array", so what do you think are the issues? >> >> I was concerned that it might confuse Common Lispers, but on reflection >> I don't think it will, even though it's possible for a simple-array to >> be displaced to (i.e. share bodies with) with another simple-array. >> The more important point is that it is not adjustable (that is, the >> dimensions can be mutated without breaking eq?). >> >> So sure, "simple-array" is fine. > > Just to muddy up the water a bit, what about "ordinary-array"? They're > ordinary in the sense that they're what we usually think of as arrays in > programming languages, and they're also ordinary in that elements are > accessed by ordinal position. And, it doesn't conflict with existing > terminology from Lisp. The more I think about it, these arrays are neither "simple" nor "ordinary". They have a backing store, an indexer that might jump around in the backing store, a storage-class that itself has several different properties, and a setter in addition to the minimal getter and domain (which is the kind of simple array that array-map, mutable-array-curry, array-curry, array-distinguish-one-axis, mutable-array-distinguish-one-axis, ... return). So in many ways what the SRFI currently calls fixed-arrays are "special", or "specialized". So how about special-array or specialized-array ??? Brad