[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Scheme-reports] Generalization of append, map, and for-each to other sequences

On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Marc Feeley <feeley@x> wrote:
> Formal Comment
> Submitter's name: Marc Feeley
> Submitter's email: feeley at iro.umontreal.ca
> Relevant draft: r7rs draft 6
> Type: defect
> Priority: major
> Relevant section of draft: 6.7. Strings, 6.8. Vectors, 6.9. Bytevectors, 6.10. Control features
> Summary: Generalization of append, map, and for-each to other sequences
> R7RS has three vector-like data types: strings, vectors and
> bytevectors.
> The procedure
>   (string-append string ...)
> exists to concatenate strings, like append concatenates lists.
> However there is no vector-append and bytevector-append which
> concatenate vectors and bytevectors.
> The procedures
>   (string-map proc string1 string2 ...)
>   (vector-map proc vector1 vector2 ...)
>   (string-for-each proc string1 string2 ...)
>   (vector-for-each proc vector1 vector2 ...)
> are for strings and vectors what map and for-each are for lists.
> There is no such procedures for bytevectors.
> For consistency, these missing procedures should be added.

Thanks, ticket #436 created.

My initial reaction is "a foolish consistency is the
hobgoblin of little minds" as has been quoted perhaps
too often on this list by now.  I don't like the
combinatorial explosion in procedures for every new
type added, and note that a general loop construct
(as will be in the large language) extends more
naturally, is often easier to read, and is almost
universally more efficient since I'm unaware of an
implementation which inlines *-map.


Scheme-reports mailing list