bear wrote:
> I think there's a far more important tradeoff that is being ignored
> here.  My problem with association lists is not storage efficiency,
> it's access time.

I agree.  I missed the justification for including association
vectors.  Why would anyone ever use such a data structure?  If
you really want it, use a vector of pairs, but even then it should
be rare enough that there is no need to standardize such
trivial and rarely-used functions.
--
	--Per Bothner
xxxxxx@bothner.com   http://per.bothner.com/