SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
Per Bothner
(04 Dec 2015 03:34 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
John Cowan
(04 Dec 2015 15:54 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix Per Bothner (04 Dec 2015 16:10 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
taylanbayirli@xxxxxx
(04 Dec 2015 16:49 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
John Cowan
(05 Dec 2015 07:05 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
John Cowan
(06 Dec 2015 06:44 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
Shiro Kawai
(04 Dec 2015 18:49 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
John Cowan
(05 Dec 2015 07:06 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
Shiro Kawai
(05 Dec 2015 07:21 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
John Cowan
(05 Dec 2015 16:51 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
Per Bothner
(05 Dec 2015 17:20 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
Shiro Kawai
(05 Dec 2015 17:39 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
John Cowan
(05 Dec 2015 20:00 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
Alex Shinn
(04 Dec 2015 16:52 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
Shiro Kawai
(04 Dec 2015 20:27 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
John Cowan
(07 Dec 2015 00:02 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
Shiro Kawai
(07 Dec 2015 07:57 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
John Cowan
(07 Dec 2015 13:09 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
John Cowan
(06 Dec 2015 02:32 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
Alex Shinn
(07 Dec 2015 19:26 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
John Cowan
(07 Dec 2015 19:48 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
Shiro Kawai
(07 Dec 2015 20:08 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
John Cowan
(07 Dec 2015 20:25 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 130 - "span" prefix
Shiro Kawai
(07 Dec 2015 20:44 UTC)
|
On 12/04/2015 07:53 AM, John Cowan wrote: > But "string" already means something in Scheme: a *mutable* sequence > of characters addressable by indexes (such that adding 1 to the index > gets the next character and subtracting 1 gets the previous character > modulo boundary cases). Not in R7RS: "Strings are sequences of characters." String may be immutable or mutable. So we already have two kinds of strings. > However, I don't see how you can avoid having separate functions > (or polymorphic functions such that cursors cannot be exact integers) > for the other span operations, which means that instead of span-ref or > istring-ref, you have string-ref/cursors: is that really an improvement? The SRFI-130 draft says that that (span-ref k) returns the k'th character of span, where k is an exact integer (not a cursor) - just like string-ref. So no need for a new name. Likewise with many of the other functions. For functions that have cursor arguments or results, then I agree we need a distinguishing name. But those appear to be in the minority. Using string-cursor- as a prefix seems reasonable, since that is already used. -- --Per Bothner xxxxxx@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/