| X-Originating-IP: [18.7.7.79]
 | Old-Return-Path: <xxxxxx@sonic.net>
 | Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:02:27 -0800 (PST)
 | From: bear <xxxxxx@sonic.net>
 | Cc: xxxxxx@srfi.schemers.org, xxxxxx@cc.gatech.edu,
 |    srfi-33@srfi.schemers.org, srfi-47@srfi.schemers.org
 | Resent-From: srfi-47@srfi.schemers.org
 | X-Mailing-List: <srfi-47@srfi.schemers.org> archive/latest/25
 | X-Loop: srfi-47@srfi.schemers.org
 | Resent-Sender: srfi-47xxxxxx@srfi.schemers.org
 |
 |
 |
 | On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Paulo Jorge de Oliveira Cantante de Matos wrote:
 |
 | I think that numbers and strings of bits are sufficiently different
 | ideas, and that the differences between them are sufficiently important,
 | that I'd support the idea of bitstrings as a separate disjoint type,
 | with its own read syntax and everything.  So I'd go for something like
 |
 | (bitwise-and \1001 \0110) => \1111
 |
 | Alternatively, you could regard bitstrings as a kind of vector and
 | read/write them using vector syntax.  In that case you'd have
 |
 | (bitwise-and #(1 0 0 1) #(0 1 1 0) )   => #(1 1 1 1)
 |
 | which is how common lisp does it.

Common-Lisp bit vectors read and write as #* followed by 0s and 1s.

(bit-and #*1001 #*0110)   => #*0000

 | But Common Lisp has typed-vector infrastructure we don't.

SRFI-47 provides typed-arrays, of which typed-vectors are the rank-1
case.

 | And suddenly, typed vectors bring us back to the current SRFI-47.
 | Should au1 be added to the set of vector types for SRFI-47, with
 | bitwise-operations and bitstring<->integer conversions defined on
 | bit arrays in a following SRFI?

SRFI-47 already supports bit-vectors with type AT1.  There is no
useful distinction between bits as 0 and 1 versus bits as #T and #F
because there is only one 2-element group.