Yes, that reflected the first version of the SRFI, and I removed it on precisely those grounds. I just forgot to remove it from the implementation. I have accordingly added bytevector-accumulator!.

I don't see any use case for reverse accumulation in a bytevector, though (and not too sure why we should have it in a vector either).

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:55 PM, Shiro Kawai <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:

I noticed that the reference implementation allows alternate calling form of vector-accumulator,
reverse-vector-accumulator and bytevector-accumulator, e.g.
(vector-accumulator n fill).
Is it intended to be in the spec?

I feel that such use case is easily covered by vector-accumulator!, e.g.
(vector-accumulator! (make-vector n fill) 0).
However, in that case, we might want reverse-vector-accumulator! and bytevector-accumulator! as well.

To unsubscribe from this list please go to http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=5UzHL2CeAJaD3HTLkrKhj41uXvyrjPVH