Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

Re: where is srfi-17 going? David Rush (05 Feb 2000 00:29 UTC)
Re: where is srfi-17 going? Per Bothner (05 Feb 2000 01:05 UTC)
Re: where is srfi-17 going? David Rush (05 Feb 2000 01:48 UTC)
Re: where is srfi-17 going? Lars Thomas Hansen (05 Feb 2000 02:57 UTC)
Re: where is srfi-17 going? David Rush (05 Feb 2000 02:05 UTC)
Re: where is srfi-17 going? sperber@xxxxxx (18 Feb 2000 14:45 UTC)
Re: where is srfi-17 going? sperber@xxxxxx (07 Feb 2000 08:56 UTC)

Re: where is srfi-17 going? David Rush 05 Feb 2000 02:02 UTC

Per> On the other hand, with Kawa's define-alias compiled with generalized
Per> set! you can ensure data structure integrity with opaque types,
Per> while still using the convenient and natural variable/set! syntax.

doofus> But we don't have Kawa's DEFINE-ALIAS in this SRFI, now do we? As it
doofus> stands, SRFI-17 opens a wide door for bad data-structure manipulation
doofus> techniques. On that basis, I still don't like it.

Actually, I overstated my case. You get bad behavior only if you ask
for it. So in that case the proposal gives programmers their just
rewards. I guess that I'm mostly back to my harmless annoyance
opinion, but I still contend that the first class location
implications of this proposal are worthy of note...

david rush
--
*think* before you send...especially at 2AM