Custom state variables
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(10 Feb 2019 15:32 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Alex Shinn
(10 Feb 2019 15:48 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(10 Feb 2019 16:38 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Alex Shinn
(11 Feb 2019 07:18 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(11 Feb 2019 08:10 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Alex Shinn
(11 Feb 2019 09:42 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (11 Feb 2019 12:48 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Jim Rees
(13 Feb 2019 05:16 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(13 Feb 2019 07:01 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Jim Rees
(13 Feb 2019 15:29 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(13 Feb 2019 16:06 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Jim Rees
(13 Feb 2019 17:07 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(13 Feb 2019 18:07 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(15 Feb 2019 07:12 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
John Cowan
(15 Feb 2019 15:00 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(15 Feb 2019 07:26 UTC)
|
Re: Custom state variables
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(11 Feb 2019 09:46 UTC)
|
Am Mo., 11. Feb. 2019 um 10:43 Uhr schrieb Alex Shinn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>: [...] > Without spending much time thinking about this originally I didn't consider it even possible in portable R7RS small, but I realize we could bind these to unique objects and key on those instead of the identifiers. > > If we really want this it would be a significant deviation, requiring changes to the spec and implementation, so would have to be a new SRFI. I might take this up if there were serious interest from R7RS large. [...] I would volunteer to write a SRFI about the environment monad (which may be of independent interest as well) and whose implementation can then be used as a basis for SRFI 159 (thanks to the modular implementation of SRFI 159 this is easy to achieve). How are `local′ and `local!′ (or `with′ and `with!′, respectively) supposed to interact? There are four possibilities: (1) `local′ conceptually creates a new scope. All changes introduced by `local!′ inside this scope are revoked when the `local′ scope is left. (2) Only changes by `local!′ to variables introduced by `local′ are revoked when the `local′ scope is left. (3) Changes by `local!′ always persist, even across `local′ scopes. (4) It's up to the implementation. (chibi monad environment) currently implements (2). -- Marc