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)
|
Per Bothner <xxxxxx@bothner.com> writes: > 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. Make-string and string seem to be specified to return mutable strings. (The "newly allocated" part makes that clear I think.) (Constants in source code are an exception as usual, and some strings returned by certain APIs. But there's no direct way to create immutable strings dynamically.) That being said, I'm with R6RS on that we should move towards immutable pairs and strings by default, not have new types for their immutable variants. In that vein, I wouldn't mind an SRFI defining ways to get immutable strings that still work with the usual non-mutating string operations. Whether SRFI 130 or another... Taylan