Kevin Wortman scripsit: > Should these procedures take SRFI 114 comparators instead of equality > predicates?
I thought about it, but only the equality predicate is actually useful, and only for a few operations. To extract the equality predicate from a comparator, use comparator-equality-predicate (binary) or make-=? (N-ary). > Are cycles actually possible in strict immutable structures? When you > create a head node, there's no way for it to have a circular link to a tail > node that doesn't exist yet. They aren't, unless they are constructed under the table. See CyclesMedernach for a preliminary proposal. > Personally I am fond of first, second, etc.; I think they are more readable > than car, cadr, etc. Okay, easy to add. > The immutable set data structures I have in mind do set-theoretic > operations in O(n) time, though constructing them from an unordered list is > O(n log n). Fair enough. > I would ditch xipair and factor out parameter rotation to a "flip" > procedure, probably in a separate library or SRFI, as defined in Chicken ( > http://wiki.call-cc.org/man/4/Unit%20data-structures#combinators ). I plan such a library anyway, but I want to make this SRFI as much as possible a drop-in replacement. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan [email protected] You cannot enter here. Go back to the abyss prepared for you! Go back! Fall into the nothingness that awaits you and your Master. Go! --Gandalf _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
