This is the mail archive of the
guile@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the Guile project.
Re: Suggestion for strings.c
Jost Boekemeier <jostobfe@linux.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE> writes:
> > > I hope not. From reading the SRFI I got the impression that:
> > >
> > > a) it suggests that a "getter" procedure returns a location and
> > > set! changes this location.
A "getter" returns the *contents* of a location, and set! changes the
(contents of) this location.
> [From the SRFI]
>
> Rationale
>
> Many programming languages have the concept of an lvalue. that is an
> "expression" that "evaluates" to a location, and which can appear on
> the left-hand-side of an assignment. Common Lisp has a related concept
> of "generalized variables" which can be used in setf and some other
> special forms. However, the Common Lisp concept is based on the idea
> of compile-time recognition of special "location-producing" functions;
> this does not seem to be in the "spirit of Scheme".
This is rationale, which provides some background. Notice the phrase
"Many programming languages" and the quotes around "evaluates".
> > leaving aside the question of taste (I think it's a good replacement),
> > you are wrong here. you set the setter to set-validate-counter-value,
> > et voila.
>
> Or even better to: "format-hard-disk". From the Emacs distribution:
If you have a point, I fail to see it.
--
--Per Bothner
per@bothner.com http://www.bothner.com/~per/