Re: Fundamental design flaws | Simplelists

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 31 Oct 2003 03:20 UTC

Show/hide attachments

On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 12:00:01PM +0900, Alex Shinn wrote:
> At Thu, 30 Oct 2003 16:52:06 -0600, xxxxxx@freenetproject.org wrote:
> >
> > 44 never just takes an existing vector or list and says "Hey, you're an
> > SRFI-44 sequence".  Valid 44 collections must be created using the
> > make-list and make-vector or list and vector constructors.  Any behavior
> > with primitive Scheme types is undefined.
>
> So SRFI-44 make-vector is incompatible with the R5RS make-vector, and
> SRFI-44 make-list is incompatible with SRFI-1 make-list?

As it currently stands no.  And if we choose to make it so we'll need
to rename them for obvious reasons.

	Scott