From: Peter Bex <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] blob-literal read syntax Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 15:39:46 +0200
> > What about #blob(...) or #m(...) (for "memory") if "blob" causes > trouble with binary number literal syntax? Yes, that would look ambiguous, I guess. > > By the way, how is the data represented? Will entering it like this > be dependent on the reading machine's endianness? It is just a sequence of bytes, so it is endian-independent. The data type already exists for a while (what used to be "bytevector" in older chickens). But since we have SRFI-4 vectors, the bytevector has become redundant, so it has been left as a "blob", a meaningless sequence of bytes. There are situations where such a thing may be useful in code, in particular, machine-generated code, so I found it reasonable to add support for literals of this type, to have a more efficient handling of such data in compiled Scheme programs (instead of constructing it at runtime). cheers, felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
