Re: hook? primitive

[Greg Badros <gjb@cs.washington.edu>]

Keith Wright <kwright@tiac.net> writes:

> > From: Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj@mdj-pc.nada.kth.se>
> > 
> > But are all of these really necessary?  I think we should be a bit
> > careful with adding new primitives.
> > 
> > (I added first class hook because I wanted it to be easier to manage
> >  hooks (putting them in data structures, like a fluid etc) but now I
> >  almost regret it.  They seem to require an unreasonable amount of
> >  support in the implementation.)
> 
> I didn't understand the need for anything at all.  Why not just a
> list of procedures?  Use CONS to add one.  OK, it may be a bit
> more complicated than that due to the need to update the head
> of the list, but still a new primitive data type seems excessive.
> Couldn't the whole thing be written in Scheme instead of C?

It's much nicer to have it in C if you want C procedures to be using the
hooks (e.g., running hooks on a window mapping event).

Greg