SRFI 185: Linear adjustable-size strings
Arthur A. Gleckler
(24 Feb 2020 18:18 UTC)
|
||
(missing)
|
||
(missing)
|
||
Re: SRFI 185: Linear adjustable-size strings Per Bothner (24 Feb 2020 19:31 UTC)
|
||
Re: SRFI 185: Linear adjustable-size strings
John Cowan
(24 Feb 2020 20:09 UTC)
|
||
Re: SRFI 185: Linear adjustable-size strings
Arthur A. Gleckler
(24 Feb 2020 19:14 UTC)
|
Re: SRFI 185: Linear adjustable-size strings Per Bothner 24 Feb 2020 19:31 UTC
On 2/24/20 11:06 AM, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen wrote: > You want to be able to apply the linear-update procedures on temporary values. In a call to `string-linear-append!' the `string' argument does not have to be a variable reference. I understand the conceptual elegance of linear-update procedures, but the trade-off is they're slightly inconvenient and hard to use safely. Which may be why no-one except the Scheme community (as far as I know) uses them. Compiler warnings can help, but how many Scheme compilers have (or could easily add) "unused function result" warnings? On 2/24/20 11:20 AM, John Cowan wrote: > Your name is on it because you wrote most of it, but I will add a no-endorsement section. Thanks. I have mixed feelings about this. > This is just the ability to declare optional static types. If a procedure is declared as returning an unspecified value, then you get a type warning if you try to use the value. Per contra, if it is declared to return a value, then you get a type warning if you do not use the value. What about procedures that have both side-effects and return a result? Would not that return too many warnings, unless the "must check/use return value" property is orthogonal from the "return type" property? -- --Per Bothner xxxxxx@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/