Re: Fundamental design flaws

Show/hide message thread

Fundamental design flaws Tom Lord (29 Oct 2003 17:46 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (29 Oct 2003 19:13 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Bradd W. Szonye (29 Oct 2003 20:06 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (29 Oct 2003 20:47 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Tom Lord (29 Oct 2003 23:24 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Taylor Campbell (30 Oct 2003 01:53 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 04:42 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Tom Lord (30 Oct 2003 16:52 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 17:11 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Tom Lord (30 Oct 2003 16:33 UTC)

RE: Fundamental design flaws Anton van Straaten (30 Oct 2003 16:52 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Bradd W. Szonye (30 Oct 2003 17:19 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 18:13 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Bradd W. Szonye (30 Oct 2003 21:18 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 21:26 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Bradd W. Szonye (30 Oct 2003 21:35 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 21:49 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Bradd W. Szonye (30 Oct 2003 21:55 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 22:05 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Bradd W. Szonye (30 Oct 2003 22:28 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 22:52 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Alex Shinn (31 Oct 2003 03:04 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (31 Oct 2003 03:20 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Alex Shinn (31 Oct 2003 07:13 UTC)

RE: Fundamental design flaws Anton van Straaten (30 Oct 2003 23:07 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Bradd W. Szonye (31 Oct 2003 03:12 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 21:57 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Tom Lord (30 Oct 2003 20:23 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 20:35 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 17:06 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Bradd W. Szonye (30 Oct 2003 17:26 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 18:15 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws bear (30 Oct 2003 18:48 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 19:35 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws bear (30 Oct 2003 19:45 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 20:08 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws bear (30 Oct 2003 20:40 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 20:48 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Tom Lord (30 Oct 2003 20:49 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx (30 Oct 2003 21:02 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws Bradd W. Szonye (30 Oct 2003 21:26 UTC)

Re: Fundamental design flaws scgmille@xxxxxx 30 Oct 2003 20:08 UTC

Show/hide attachments

On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 11:45:26AM -0800, bear wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 xxxxxx@freenetproject.org wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 10:48:34AM -0800, bear wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 xxxxxx@freenetproject.org wrote:
> >>
> >> >I'd like to know what beyond lacking collection specific shortcut
> >> >functions is inefficient in the current SRFI.
> >>
> >> You're joking, right?  Without the "shortcut functions" as you call them
> >> being more efficient, there is no reason for most of these collections to
> >> exist at all.
> >
> >But they cannot be defined if they don't apply to the general class of
> >collections.  They need to be defined for those concrete classes or a
> >more specific general one (like ordered tree).
>
> Of course they can be defined for generic collections.  You can get
> the last element of a list; it's just the worst possible structure
> for that operation to be efficient.  Similarly, you can get a range
> of keys from an unordered alist, or any of the other "shortcut"
> operations.

But what about a dictionary with no ordering at all?