>> From: Taylor R Campbell <[email protected]> >> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 02:23:51 -0400 >> >> What advantage does a disjoint data type have over writing (foo 'bar: >> baz 'quux: zot)?
I'm writing up a rationale. On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Matt Birkholz <[email protected]> wrote: > > I am just hoping this is for SRFI support, Not *solely* for SRFI support, but there's no reason to disavow credit. > not something we would use in our own system... I don't think I'd impose this on anyone else. I have an interesting use-case in mind, but I'm not about to start adding them willy-nilly to the existing code base. > or is this NOT the "Old School" Scheme congregation? (Ummm... :-)? I certainly consider myself part of the `Old School'. (Despite accusations!) > > Can I write > > (make-sumpn 'color "red") > > as well as > > (make-sumpn :color "red") > > (make-sumpn color: "red") > > and > > (make-sumpn :color: "red") > > Sorry. Not the last one? ? Ok, I'll fix that. -- ~jrm _______________________________________________ MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel
