More noodling: It occurred to me that since most of the sequence combinators use nth iteratively, maybe we actually have a cursor protocol already. The names of the generic words don't work, but if we treat the following words as if they had a slightly different meaning:
nth ( cursor seq -- elt ) length ( seq -- cursor ) 1+ ( cursor -- cursor ) Then all that's needed is for the combinators to call a 'begin' word in order to obtain the cursor in its inital state (i.e. fixnum 0 for the current containers). (actually 1+ isn't a generic word, but you get the idea) N.B. Not suggesting this is a solution, just thinking aloud. I suppose the useful bit is that the cursor doesn't actually need to be a specially allocated tuple. -Phil ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Factor-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
