Scheme language standardization process
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/2011 01:18 AM, Alex Shinn wrote: > On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 11:44 PM, Jussi Piitulainen > <jpiitula@x> wrote: >> >> Do all these need to remain in the language? In (scheme base)? > > We should put them somewhere for compatibility, but > I definitely think everything but the one and two depth > combinations should be removed from (scheme base). > Their use is generally a code smell. People should > use destructuring, records, or SRFI-1 first..tenth accessors. > The historic use of these entities was as accessors for structured aggregates implemented with cons cells. In a language that directly supports records, they have a reduced mission. It was possible to implement a general macro version (that parsed the token and expanded it as far as necessary) of the "c(a|d)+r" operators using the old "explode" and "implode" commands to destructure the symbol itself, but those have been eliminated since, I think, R4RS. And I don't think it would work with current macrology anyway. Bear -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOoFTeAAoJEAOzWkqOibfNqhcIAKEXGifVrBtWaqbEk0gCRj8M nASe3L9o1hPeP1Xia8ffVcXu5gSP0ArxZk9abtRMevODYVggJThzRec05NwBRhxs KbkdD0WEapjF9cz8sUsMRh6EZZqimSsLs0b79i5VR5zgcmxoyHgI9FalIWznxmkB OvxZtj6yg0sl6TIV0J0pEPo+sKJ+aP46WFkAfuokWX0Aohqpt26crBBmsovHysKW 2BLfOHXePI2jmpK6tw+6jWPeu/UtTyQEbpqf0YqdeYoM2WIBK4FsoB0YqvywuPIJ MakKDARSfw2+Ead8szwV58YUWKrHyI1S2LDwDzJxDi4Fby7bpdO3nFpDAaZhnaA= =Kse0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@x http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports