Re: hash-table-{to, from}-alist

[tomas]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 09:27:18PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> address@hidden writes:
> 
>  > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:18:41PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>  > [...]
>  > > I was thinking of something more like #<hash-table ...> where
>  > > "..."

[...]

>  > I like this one more: it is more extensible [...]

[...]

> I'm not sure what's wrong with
>
>         (let ((tbl (make-hash-table ...)))
>           (puthash key1 val1 tbl)
>           ...)
>
> as a read syntax for hash tables.

Hm. Abstraction? Separate "how it's spelt" from "how it's done"?

Not that I think it has much weight. Make-hash-table is an abstraction
itself, after all. I couldn't decide between both variants.

Regards
- -- tomás




>  > 
>  > I like this one more: it is more extensible (not that lots of extensions
>  > will spring up, but at least the syntax is not in the way if someday...
>  > you know).
> 
> I'm not sure what's wrong with
> 
>         (let ((tbl (make-hash-table ...)))
>           (puthash key1 val1 tbl)
>           ...)
> 
> as a read syntax for hash tables.
> 
> N.B. XEmacs and SXEmacs already have lots of object types.  If you're
> going to start proliferating `read'able print syntaxes, starting with
> an extensible one would be nice.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFJKCN2Bcgs9XrR2kYRAncCAJ48gH/pAj1pwGYC30ib8tif2YqLFQCeLitk
YgVNDIKOihglmb+j7a8PAec=
=oX27
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----