>
>    From: Brad Lucier <xxxxxx@math.purdue.edu>
>
>    >    I hope you don't try to define predicate->bitset in a later SRFI ;-).
>    >
>    > Well, I guess it's too late to put it into the lset-... suite of
>    > operations in SRFI 1...
>
>    My unstated (definitely understated) point is that predicate->bitset
>    will never return in the general case, which isn't much different from
>    how long it will take predicate->char-set to return on systems that use
>    a four-byte character representation.
>
> Yep, I understood. Just a little bit of wry academic humor there, on my
> part.
>
> Clearly people who use 4-byte char types will have to stear clear of
> ops that are linear in the type size.
>     -Olin
>

I'm trying to think of a way to embed an escape procedure into
predicate->char-set[!].  Is the following legal?  Does it solve
the "I only want to examine ASCII characters to build this set"
problem?

(define cs
  (let ((result (char-set)))
    (call-with-current-continuation
     (lambda (exit)
       (predicate->char-set! (lambda (ch) (or (char=? ch #\newline)
					      (and (> (char->integer ch) 127)
						   (exit))))
			     result)))
    result))

I suppose one would need a guarantee that characters are examined in
(char->integer ch) order, and it would have to add the character to
result immediately when the predicate returned true, and it isn't
linear update, and ...

Oh well.

Brad