SRFI-122 Bradley Lucier (21 Oct 2015 17:49 UTC)
Re: SRFI-122 Arthur A. Gleckler (21 Oct 2015 20:20 UTC)
Re: SRFI-122 Bradley Lucier (23 Oct 2015 18:29 UTC)
Re: SRFI-122 Arthur A. Gleckler (23 Oct 2015 18:31 UTC)
Re: SRFI-122 Per Bothner (23 Oct 2015 18:53 UTC)
Re: SRFI-122 Arthur A. Gleckler (08 Mar 2016 17:37 UTC)
Re: SRFI-122 Jamison Hope (23 Oct 2015 18:26 UTC)

SRFI-122 Bradley Lucier 21 Oct 2015 17:49 UTC

Arthur:

Putting together SRFI-122 and then dealing with the (relatively few)
comments was really a learning experience for me.

I can't finalize this to my satisfaction within the 90 days allowed.

It's clear that I have a concrete vision of how arrays should work that
is different from the lower-level views of previous proposals, but I
have not been terribly effective in getting this vision across.

Additionally, my initial proposal had a bunch of bells and whistles that
I thought people would like, but which added complexity that nobody
seemed to appreciate.

Finally, I should add {interval|array}-permute procedures and maybe
remove the {interval|array}-distinguish-one-axis procedures.  The latter
are important in practice, but the *-permute procedures are more
fundamental (*-distinguish-one-axis is the composition of *-permute and
*-curry) and of interest in their own rights.  E.g., various views of a
CT scan are set up via *-permute + *-curry.

This is not a question of adding new routines, I think I need to have a
different set of base routines to have a coherent initial SRFI.

So I currently plan to withdraw the SRFI for now and resubmit later.

Do you have any thoughts or comments before I do so?

Thanks.

Brad

PS: Decided to CC this to SRFI-122 mail list in case anyone else has
comments.