> Ed has proposed some stack effect changes to core collection words and > Dan is toying with generic collection protocols but I'm still undecided > as to whether these ideas are worthwhile, and if adding them now will > postpone 1.0 too far. Perhaps both can be merged into one proposal: a > generic collections vocabulary implementing new stack effects. This > would go in extra/ and people would be free to use it but the core code > would not change and existing code using core sequence and collection > words wouldn't need updates either. Ed and Dan, what do you think?
I don't completely see what benefit it would bring to merge the two ideas; they're fairly orthogonal. Either way, I'm completely fine with putting generic collections in extra/, especially since they don't exist. My hypothesis is that they'll allow code duplication between assocs and sequences, but since they don't exist, I can't say that with any certainty. The hope is that generic collections can be implemented in a way that's consistent with basically the current API for assocs and sequences, but that the manipulation words for these will become only more general. Dan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
