|
SRFI 130: 120 days
Arthur A. Gleckler
(01 Apr 2016 19:25 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI 130: 120 days
John Cowan
(01 Apr 2016 20:40 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI 130: 120 days
Alex Shinn
(02 Apr 2016 14:32 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI 130: 120 days
John Cowan
(02 Apr 2016 16:29 UTC)
|
|
index/cursor merging [was: 120 days]
Per Bothner
(03 Apr 2016 19:16 UTC)
|
|
Re: index/cursor merging [was: 120 days]
John Cowan
(03 Apr 2016 19:40 UTC)
|
|
Re: index/cursor merging [was: 120 days]
Alex Shinn
(04 Apr 2016 01:18 UTC)
|
|
Re: index/cursor merging [was: 120 days] Per Bothner (04 Apr 2016 02:56 UTC)
|
|
Re: index/cursor merging [was: 120 days]
Alex Shinn
(04 Apr 2016 05:39 UTC)
|
Re: index/cursor merging [was: 120 days] Per Bothner 04 Apr 2016 02:55 UTC
On 04/03/2016 05:44 PM, Alex Shinn wrote: > I think Kawa would want to use a disjoint cursor type. That's possible, but fragile. A string-cursor is a distinct type in Kawa - which is implemented using the same unboxed 32-bit int that are used for indexes. The two can be distinguished at compile-time, but the JVM run-time representations are the same. However, when a string-cursor is *boxed* then a different class is used, so it is possible to distinguish them. For Kawa I'm focusing on generic sequence functions, including relatively cheap substrings, so SRFI-130 isn't a priority. -- --Per Bothner xxxxxx@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/