Hey Alex,

(srfi 146 hash) has an implementation now (not in the main repo, though).

A library (you proposed to name it "(srfi 146)") that exports both ordered and hash maps at the same time won't probably be imported very often, so I don't think it is important to specify such a library.

The current state of unbalanced library names will go away as soon as SRFI 146 becomes a part of R7RS-large (the SRFI proposes to name the two libraries (scheme mapping) and (scheme hashmap)).

The current (unbalanced) names have historical roots. In a previous iteration of this proposal, (srfi 146 hash) was optional.

If you think it is really important to be able to import (srfi 146 mapping) or (srfi 146 ordered), I could add such a library name to the spec and would alias it to (srfi 146) so that the SRFI remains compatible with its previous iterations.

Best,

Marc

Alex Shinn <xxxxxx@gmail.com> schrieb am Do., 8. März 2018 um 06:24 Uhr:
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 8:42 AM, John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org> wrote:
We don't have an implementation of (srfi 146 hash) at present, so unless Marc rules otherwise,hashmaps will be moved to another SRFI anyway.  I have sent him a proposed draft with ordered mappings only.

That sounds like an acceptable tree rotation.

Thanks, and thanks Marc for the SRFI, I recently needed this!

--
Alex
 

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Alex Shinn <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
The two libraries (srfi 146) and (srfi 146 hash) feel unbalanced.
How about:

  (srfi 146): all bindings
  (srfi 146 ordered): mapping*
  (srfi 146 hash): hashmap*

-- 
Alex

To unsubscribe from this list please go to http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=rBAxDxCgJFjJUssha9ixdMZU57qO20An

To unsubscribe from this list please go to http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=oa8YQq670QJsajDJIblEsMJ9MoezHUAm