>>>>> "Olin" == shivers  <xxxxxx@ai.mit.edu> writes:

Olin>    From: xxxxxx@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de

Olin> I believe a specifically shared-text substring library is a valuable thing,
Olin> and should be designed and made into a SRFI. But remember that most Schemes
Olin> today do not provide shared-text substrings, so as soon as you start coding
Olin> to this API, you punt portability.

That's why I suggested a separate SRFI.  Scheme systems can choose not
so support it.

Olin>    On the other hand, *optional* shard-text substrings make for very difficult
Olin>    debugging, especially if your base implementation does not support them.

Olin> No it doesn't. Programmers do not have to use the shared-text-allowed
Olin> routines, ever. There are pure-copying alternatives for every
Olin> shared-text-allowed routine. So you can avoid using them except in the
Olin> cases where you know it's worth it, or there's a clear-cut opportunity
Olin> for optimisation that can be exploited by essentially annotating your
Olin> calls with the shared-text-allowed tag.

But I may be *wrong* seeing an opportunity for optimization where in
fact there is none.  A Scheme system without shared-text substrings
will obscure the bug.

--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla