On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Zefram <zef...@fysh.org> wrote: > FWIW, I think Scalar is a good reification, and the language would > be better with it being visible, provided that everything relevant > can handle it. >
It can't handle it. The implementation is precisely that needed for mutables; your multiple attempts to use them as something else are things that will not change, because *Scalar is not what you think it is*. It is *precisely* the implementation of mutable containers, and that is why it behaves in ways that you believe are "wrong"; making it behave the way you think it should will break mutable containers, or require reintroduction of the original Scalar to again be the implementation of mutable containers. This is not to claim that the thing you are looking for is in any way wrong; it just is not Scalar. You will indeed be disappointed if you keep trying to treat Scalar as the thing you want that it is not. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allber...@gmail.com ballb...@sinenomine.net unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net
