Re: Almost, but not quite: C++ STL in LilyPond

[Dan Eble]

On May 5, 2020, at 11:09, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> I'd like to come up with an allocator/container programming model
> comparatively similar to the STL one so that one could mostly steal the
> implementations and "just" add the required Scheme awareness while
> removing of destruction/deallocation tracking.

It might be difficult for me to devote the time to this discussion that it 
deserves, but I want to say that I've been working on C++ wrappers that allow 
walking SCM lists (of immediate values or Smobs) with standard iterator syntax 
and semantics.  I suppose that's tangential to what you are talking about, but 
it would be disappointing if we did significant overlapping work.

Regards,
— 
Dan