[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg
From: |
Felix Winkelmann |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg |
Date: |
Sat, 15 Mar 2008 17:33:49 +0100 (CET) |
From: Alex Shinn <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 02:36:45 +0900
> >>>>> "Tobia" == Tobia Conforto <address@hidden> writes:
>
> Tobia> Alex Shinn wrote:
> >> I'm considering changing the utf8 egg to no longer
> >> use syntax-case modules, so that it would work like
> >> the numbers egg.
> >>
> >> The way this would work is that, naturally, if you
> >> wanted to use utf8 semantics you'd just (use utf8),
> >> this time with no need for syntax-case and nothing to
> >> import.
> >>
> >> External modules, by default, would integrate
> >> standard string procedures and not be affected.
> >> However, if you wanted to make an extension
> >> optionally work with utf8 semantics you could compile
> >> it with (declare (not usual-integrations))
>
> Tobia> This seems very straightforward and natural.
> Tobia> What are the disadvantages, if any? (except for
> Tobia> compatibility, aka. tremendous breakage as Felix
> Tobia> put it)
>
> Tobia> I mean, what does the syntax-case module system
> Tobia> gives us with regard to the utf8 egg that the
> Tobia> proposed, numbers-like system wouldn't allow?
> Tobia> Why was it done like that in the first place?
>
> When it was originally written, it would indeed have
> incurred tremendous breakage, because most string operations
> were not inlined. It really wasn't even a consideration.
>
> When Felix says it would incur tremendous breakage now, I
> believe he's referring to the fact that people who are
> currently using utf8 are all writing:
>
> (use utf8)
> (import utf8)
>
> and now they'll have to remove the import line from their
> existing code. Since we've just gone 3.0, now seems like
> the ideal time to induce such breakage though.
>
Alex, what happens if I pass string operators as first
class values? These don't get inlined. What happens now?
cheers,
felix
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, (continued)
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/11
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Felix Winkelmann, 2008/03/12
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Robin Lee Powell, 2008/03/13
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Alex Shinn, 2008/03/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Alex Shinn, 2008/03/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, John Cowan, 2008/03/15
- Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Alex Shinn, 2008/03/15
Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Tobia Conforto, 2008/03/14
Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Alex Shinn, 2008/03/16
Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, felix winkelmann, 2008/03/17
Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Alex Shinn, 2008/03/17
Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, felix winkelmann, 2008/03/17
Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Kon Lovett, 2008/03/17
Re: [Chicken-users] ditching syntax-case modules for the utf8 egg, Graham Fawcett, 2008/03/17