Re: some srfi122 comments Per Bothner 28 Sep 2015 19:50 UTC

On 09/26/2015 10:22 PM, Per Bothner wrote:
> *The interval API is big.  This could be avoided if intervals
> were vectors or arrays (as SRFI-25 shapes).  It is nice to
> abstract away the representation, but not at the cost of
> 19 new procedures!

More fundamentally: It's nice to have the flexibility of non-zero
lower index bounds, but it does complicate the API a lot, and it
adds some extra run-time overhead - without adding any extra "power".

If we drop non-zero lower bounds, then "an internal" is just
a vector of integers, and no "interval API" is needed.
	--Per Bothner