On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Andreas Rottmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi! > > I've now started with splitting out stuff from spells, and stumbled upon > one case I'd like to get feedback on: in the foof-loop package, I'd like > to add `nested-foof-loop', a library built on foof-loop that provides > for a more concise way of expressing nested loops. That library needs (a > subset of) stream.scm[0], which I've extended in obvious ways with a few > procedures having the same interface as SRFI 41 (Streams). Now > streams.scm is very minimal, and the extensions have precedence in SRFI > 41 -- does it make sense to include them in the "ported" collection, or > should I refrain from doing so? Arguments in either direction would be > appriciated! > > [ Why not use SRFI-41 directly? streams.scm builds upon SRFI 45 > (Primitives for Expressing Iterative Lazy Algorithms), and the space > leak explained in that SRFI is essential to be fixed for > nested-foof-loop. ] > > [0] http://mumble.net/~campbell/scheme/stream.scm > > Regards, Rotty > -- > Andreas Rottmann -- <http://rotty.yi.org/> > There is no space leak in SRFI-41, which uses exactly the primitives of SRFI-45. It was SRFI-40 that suffered the space leak, which is the reason it is deprecated.
