On 09/01/2015 03:11 PM, Jamison Hope wrote:
> On Aug 31, 2015, at 5:50 PM, Bradley Lucier <xxxxxx@math.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>> On 08/31/2015 05:49 PM, John Cowan wrote:
>>> Bradley Lucier scripsit:
>>>
>>>> I've sort of given up trying to get a descriptive word that
>>>> describes what makes fixed-arrays special or specialized, so I'd
>>>> just like to change it to special-array (as it's shorter than
>>>> specialized-array).
>>>
>>> How about using general-array for what you now call arrays, and use
>>> array for the fixed-arrays, then?  Move the generality up one level,
>>> so to speak.
>>>
>>
>> Well, I prefer array-map, array-curry, etc., to general-array-map, general-array-curry, ...
>
> You could still call them that, right?  array-setter only works with
> mutable-arrays, but it's not called mutable-array-setter.

I'll think about how that would work.

>
>
> Maybe this is a silly question, but does the SRFI even need to mention
> fixed-arrays and mutable-arrays as types with their own functions?
> If the point of this library is to make various indexable things look
> like arrays, and enable uniform access to them, then shouldn't it just
> offer functions that operate on generalized arrays?  (Why do we need to
> have fixed-array-curry and mutable-array-curry?  Shouldn't everything
> just use array-curry?)

array-{curry,distinguish-one-axis} returns an array of arrays, can be
applied to any type of array.

mutable-array-{curry,distinguish-one-axis} returns an array of
mutable-arrays, can be applied only to mutable-arrays (which includes
fixed-arrays with the current SRFI text).

fixed-array-{curry,distinguish-one-axis} returns an array of
fixed-arrays, can be applied only to fixed-arrays.

Brad