Am Fr., 19. Aug. 2022 um 12:03 Uhr schrieb Lassi Kortela <xxxxxx@lassi.io>:
>
> > Lisp has a standard term for these things of which you speak: locatives.
> > Zetalisp, the pre-CL of the Lisp Machine, had low-level locatives
> > documented at <https://hanshuebner.github.io/lmman/fd-loc.xml
> > <https://hanshuebner.github.io/lmman/fd-loc.xml>>. Locatives were
> > removed from CL because they were considered not portable enough, but
> > there is a portable package cl-locatives at
> > <https://quickref.common-lisp.net/cl-locatives.html
> > <https://quickref.common-lisp.net/cl-locatives.html>>.
>
> Common Lisp also has "places" which are used for generalized reference
> http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/26_glo_p.htm#place. Scheme's SRFI 17
> (Generalized set!) is a copy of this.
>
> However, places (like RnRS locations) are not a first-class type. They
> are implied by the existence of suitable getters and setters.
>
> See CLHS 5.1 Generalized Reference (http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/05_a.htm)
>
> And especially 5.1.2 Kinds of Places (http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/05_a.htm)

See the message at
https://srfi-email.schemers.org/srfi-17/msg/2778561/ and the following
discussion for why there are good arguments against a SRFI-17-style
addition to Scheme.  I definitely subscribe to these arguments. Per,
the author of SRFI 17, does not. But we already had such a discussion
and continuing it should happen somewhere else.