Hello!
pukkamustard skribis:
> I'm all for including SRFI-146 in Guile proper!
>
> If nobody else is up for it, I'll try and prepare some patches.
Yay, awesome!
Please make sure to add a section to the manual, tests, and then see
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Hello,
>
> pukkamustard skribis:
>
>> I've been using SRFI-146
>> (https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-146/srfi-146.html) for functional
>> mappings. There's a Guile port:
>> https://inqlab.net/git/guile-srfi-146.git/ (also in Guix -
>> guile-srfi-146).
>
> I’m late to
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> pukkamustard skribis:
>
>> I've been using SRFI-146
>> (https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-146/srfi-146.html) for functional
>> mappings. There's a Guile port:
>> https://inqlab.net/git/guile-srfi-146.git/ (also in Guix -
>> guile-srfi-146).
>
> I’m late to the party, but
Hello,
pukkamustard skribis:
> I've been using SRFI-146
> (https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-146/srfi-146.html) for functional
> mappings. There's a Guile port:
> https://inqlab.net/git/guile-srfi-146.git/ (also in Guix -
> guile-srfi-146).
I’m late to the party, but I think it’d be nice to
Linus Björnstam writes:
> On Sat, 4 Mar 2023, at 17:38, pukkamustard wrote:
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> Makes me wonder, are Andy Wingo's fash/fector purely functional? Why do
>> they need atomic boxes? Aren't they only necessary for destructive
>> updates?
>
> This is to make sure that
On Sat, 4 Mar 2023, at 17:38, pukkamustard wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> Makes me wonder, are Andy Wingo's fash/fector purely functional? Why do
> they need atomic boxes? Aren't they only necessary for destructive
> updates?
This is to make sure that transient-fectors/flashes (in-place mutation with
Hi Dave,
"Thompson, David" writes:
[..]
> Your Guile port of (srfi srfi-146 hash) looks really nice! A
> functional hash is the most important data structure for our needs at
> Spritely. Do you know if it's thread-safe (unlike vhashes)? Andy's
> fash implementation uses atomic boxes, for
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023, at 11:04 AM, Thompson, David wrote:
> Hi pukkamustard,
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 3:34 AM pukkamustard wrote:
>>
>>
>> I've been using SRFI-146
>> (https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-146/srfi-146.html) for functional
>> mappings. There's a Guile port:
>>
Hi pukkamustard,
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 3:34 AM pukkamustard wrote:
>
>
> I've been using SRFI-146
> (https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-146/srfi-146.html) for functional
> mappings. There's a Guile port:
> https://inqlab.net/git/guile-srfi-146.git/ (also in Guix -
> guile-srfi-146).
Your Guile
I've been using SRFI-146
(https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-146/srfi-146.html) for functional
mappings. There's a Guile port:
https://inqlab.net/git/guile-srfi-146.git/ (also in Guix -
guile-srfi-146).
It would be nice to also have a Guile port of SRFI-113 (Sets and bags -
Op 27-02-2023 om 14:17 schreef Jessica Tallon:
Hello,
I've been thinking how it'd be nice to have available in Guile a number of
purely functional datatypes, these being hashmaps, vectors, and sets. I've
been wondering what folks have been using for these with the idea that we
could bring
11 matches
Mail list logo
