Re: Position of the Judean People's Front d96-mst@xxxxxx (14 Dec 1999 13:57 UTC)
Re: Position of the Judean People's Front d96-mst@xxxxxx 14 Dec 1999 13:57 UTC
In article <email@example.com>,
firstname.lastname@example.org (Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor]) wrote:
>- What's the rationale for having STRING-DO-EACH on top of
I wonder that too. I haven't got any sensible explanation.
>- I really am for dumping the case-fiddling and recognition procedures
> and suffixes. The way they are now, they are woefully
> underspecified and thorougly anglocentric.
I think they should be preserved (except for the CAPITALIZE stuff), but
better specified. An easy solution is to define it in terms of the
CHAR-CI procedures, CHAR-UPCASE and CHAR-DOWNCASE.
>- The same holds for the inequality predicates, unless their
> specifications would change to refer to the return value of
I don't see the problem here. They are defined in terms of CHAR<?, and
CHAR<? does refer to CHAR->INTEGER in R5RS (page 29).
I think it's a good idea to define everything in terms of the character
procedures in R5RS (section 6.3.4).
>- I think the name STRING-CONCATENATE is badly chosen. Why not
I wonder if it's really nessesary at all. Is there really a need to
concatenate so many strings that (apply string-append list-of-strings)
doesn't work? What is the lowest known limit on number of
arguments to procedures in a sensible Scheme implementation?
>- The "Lower-Level Procedures" are exclusively for argument checking.
> They're not particularly low-level, nor are they all procedures.
> This should be stated.
> The procedures contain veiled references to a condition system, and
> even try to pass information to it, which it may or not be able to
> use. In their present form, they should go.
I do agree.
>- The Knuth-Morris-Pratt stuff should also really go into a separate
> SRFI. It's useful, but much more rarely than the other stuff.
I think it can be useful, but it hasn't much to do with string
processing. The SUBSTRING? procedure is probably better implemented
with Boyer-Moore. Remove the KMP stuff from this SRFI and perhaps make
a separate SRFI with it.
>- Oh, and I vote for bagging CAPITALIZE-STRING[!].