SRFI 125 draft 8 comments
Sudarshan S Chawathe
(07 May 2016 21:13 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 125 draft 8 comments
Sudarshan S Chawathe
(07 May 2016 21:38 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 125 draft 8 comments
Per Bothner
(07 May 2016 22:12 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 125 draft 8 comments
John Cowan
(08 May 2016 02:17 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 125 draft 8 comments
John Cowan
(08 May 2016 17:48 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 125 draft 8 comments taylanbayirli@xxxxxx (09 May 2016 07:03 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 125 draft 8 comments
John Cowan
(09 May 2016 20:13 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 125 draft 8 comments
Arthur A. Gleckler
(09 May 2016 20:25 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 125 draft 8 comments
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(12 May 2016 15:49 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 125 draft 8 comments taylanbayirli@xxxxxx 09 May 2016 07:03 UTC
John Cowan <xxxxxx@mercury.ccil.org> writes: > In alist->hashtable, the leftmost value of a key wins, because alists > are searched left to right. I've added clarifying language. Aw crap, I messed that up in SRFI-126. It defines alist->*hashtable through the simplistic snippet (let ((ht (make-*hashtable ...))) (for-each (lambda (entry) (hashtable-set! ht (car entry) (cdr entry))) alist) ht) which means the last key in the alist wins. How do I atone for this? There is no official errata process for SRFIs, is there? It's a nontrivial change, too. Taylan