Re: [Scheme-reports] Seeking review of sets and hash tables proposals

[Evan Hanson <evhan@x>]

Could hash-table-delete! be extended to return true when a value has
been removed, false otherwise? This would be backwards-compatible with
SRFI-69 & R6RS and match the behavior of some existing implementations,
and you've already set a (useful IMHO) precedent for this pattern with
the set, bag, enum- & integer-set variants, as well as bag-increment!
and -decrement!.

I find {integer,enum}-set-{min,max}! slightly confusing. They seem to me
to do two things at once, and it's unclear from their names exactly what
those are. If they're necessary, renaming them to e.g.
integer-set-remove-min! would make their purposes more clear.

Also, I believe "set-length?" should be "set-length" (on the proposal
page -- it's already the latter in the reference implementation), and
"set<=?" and "set>=?" should be "enum<=?" and "enum>=?" under the
"Enumeration sets" section.

Evan

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports