Marc Feeley scripsit: > Summary: Bytevectors should be called u8vectors
Formal Comment ticket #435 filed. > I see no reason to introduce new names. It will require many > implementations to implement the new names, and moreover the SRFI-4 > names will have to be kept for code which uses SRFI-4. This is > needless bloat. Though in general the WG voted on the first ballot to prefer SRFI choices over R6RS ones, a specific vote was taken on the third ballot which preferred 'bytevector' to 'blob'. The terms 'u8vector', 'byte-vector', and 'octet-vector' were also on the ballot, but were nobody's first choice. > I also find the names bytevector-u8-ref and bytevector-u8-set! > very clumsy and verbose compared to u8vector-ref and u8vector-set!. http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/wiki/BlobAPI , which was reviewed but not adopted by WG1 (it may become part of R7RS-large, however) proposes two sets of names, one of the form bytevector-<type>-ref which is indexed by byte index, and one of the fomr <type>vector-ref which is indexed by element number and is SRFI-4 compatible. In the case of u8 and s8 these of course coincide. However, it would be very inconsistent to use u8vector-ref in the small language, where u8 is the only access type directly supported. I am therefore closing this ticket. -- John Cowan <[email protected]> http://www.ccil.org/~cowan But no living man am I! You look upon a woman. Eowyn I am, Eomund's daughter. You stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone, if you be not deathless. For living or dark undead, I will smite you if you touch him. _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
