R7RS defines parameters, which we'll eventually need to implement anyway for compliance. Converting the system's bindings over to parameters is probably the right thing for a variety of reasons.
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:49 AM, Taylor R Campbell <campb...@mumble.net>wrote: > Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 20:00:54 -0700 > From: Matt Birkholz <p...@birchwood-abbey.net> > > If we want SMP(?) and don't want it in a distant fork, we might just > bite the bullet and replace our fluid bindings with fluid objects > (like e.g. s48's). That's an assq on each reference but the thread- > local values are stored and accessed in a straightforward manner, and > there is no winding and unwinding in state-space:global at every > thread switch. > > That's what I have been intending to do for ages. For large sets of > fluids like the compiler uses, we could merge them into one fluid with > a large data structure. > > We might use a balanced binary tree instead of an alist, but it > probably won't make a big difference. Also, it might be worth looking > into what Racket calls `parametrizations'. > > _______________________________________________ > MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list > MIT-Scheme-devel@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel >
_______________________________________________ MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list MIT-Scheme-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel
