type disjointness
Alex Shinn
(02 Jan 2019 06:47 UTC)
|
Re: type disjointness
John Cowan
(02 Jan 2019 13:27 UTC)
|
Re: type disjointness Per Bothner (06 Jan 2019 07:10 UTC)
|
Re: type disjointness
John Cowan
(07 Jan 2019 14:21 UTC)
|
Re: type disjointness
Arthur A. Gleckler
(07 Jan 2019 16:13 UTC)
|
Re: type disjointness
John Cowan
(07 Jan 2019 20:59 UTC)
|
Re: type disjointness
Per Bothner
(10 Jan 2019 20:19 UTC)
|
Re: type disjointness
John Cowan
(10 Jan 2019 22:38 UTC)
|
Re: type disjointness
Per Bothner
(11 Jan 2019 01:04 UTC)
|
Re: type disjointness
John Cowan
(11 Jan 2019 01:50 UTC)
|
Re: type disjointness
Per Bothner
(11 Jan 2019 19:41 UTC)
|
I think it would be helpful to allow, but not require, that the uniform vector types be vectors. Specifically, to allow that both (TAGvector? VAL) and (vector? VAL) may be true for the same VAL, but that (TAG1vector? VAL) and (TAG2vector? VAL) may not both be true for different TAG1 and TAG2 (except bytevector and u8vector). Consider a procedure that works on array indexes, such as build-array in srfi 164. On some systems (including Kawa) it would be desirable to use s32vector for the indexes, and to use use s32vector-ref to access a specific index. But that reduces portability. It would be beneficial to be able to use vector-ref, even if the argument is a s32vector. (Of course, using vector-ref may be less efficient than using s32vector-ref.) -- --Per Bothner xxxxxx@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/