Re: name an array function

2016-12-15 Thread tomas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 12:12:58PM +0100, Daniel Llorens wrote: > > On 23 Nov 2016, at 21:48, David Pirotte wrote: [...] > > I'd use > > > > array-slice-ref/set! > > array-slice-for-each > > > > Unless I miss understood something :) > >

Re: name an array function

2016-12-15 Thread Daniel Llorens
On 23 Nov 2016, at 21:48, David Pirotte wrote: > Le Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:07:30 +0100, > Daniel Llorens a écrit : > >> On 21 Nov 2016, at 14:56, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: >> >>> I (politely) disagree: the most "commonly" used function is >>> already array-ref, so you would seldomly use array-from

Re: name an array function

2016-11-23 Thread David Pirotte
Le Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:07:30 +0100, Daniel Llorens a écrit : > On 21 Nov 2016, at 14:56, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > I (politely) disagree: the most "commonly" used function is > > already array-ref, so you would seldomly use array-from/slice > > for a scalar result (the rank-0 result will be

Re: name an array function

2016-11-23 Thread tomas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 05:07:30PM +0100, Daniel Llorens wrote: > > On 21 Nov 2016, at 14:56, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > I (politely) disagree: the most "commonly" used function is > > already array-ref, so you would seldomly use array-from/slice

Re: name an array function

2016-11-23 Thread Daniel Llorens
On 21 Nov 2016, at 14:56, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > I (politely) disagree: the most "commonly" used function is > already array-ref, so you would seldomly use array-from/slice > for a scalar result (the rank-0 result will be more frequent, > because there's no substitute). But hey, as I said. I

Re: name an array function

2016-11-21 Thread Daniel Llorens
On 21 Nov 2016, at 15:01, Panicz Maciej Godek wrote: > As far as accessors are concerned, I'm not sure whether they actaully need > names. Maybe it would be better to make them applicable, and produce > "procedures with setters"? I'd absolutely prefer (A i j) to (array-whatever A i j). Arrays

Re: name an array function

2016-11-21 Thread Panicz Maciej Godek
2016-11-21 11:32 GMT+01:00 Daniel Llorens : > > Hello, > > version 2.2 of Guile will (I hope) include rank-polymorphic versions of > array-ref, array-set! and array-for-each. What this means is that instead > of requiring as many indices as the rank of the array, with these functions > you can giv

Re: name an array function

2016-11-21 Thread tomas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 02:42:58PM +0100, Daniel Llorens wrote: > > On 21 Nov 2016, at 14:24, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > > So should "slice" prevail, it'd make sense to "invert" the star > > (array-slice corresponding to array-from* and vice-versa)?

Re: name an array function

2016-11-21 Thread Daniel Llorens
On 21 Nov 2016, at 14:24, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > So should "slice" prevail, it'd make sense to "invert" the star > (array-slice corresponding to array-from* and vice-versa)? I think it's more important to give the simpler names to the functions that are more commonly used. So I would keep th

Re: name an array function

2016-11-21 Thread tomas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 02:10:12PM +0100, Daniel Llorens wrote: > > On 21 Nov 2016, at 13:55, wrote: > > > > it (numpy, to mention a popular one. You don't need to say A[i, :, :], > > > you can just say A[i].). However, the maintainers spoke agains

Re: name an array function

2016-11-21 Thread Daniel Llorens
On 21 Nov 2016, at 13:55, wrote: > > it (numpy, to mention a popular one. You don't need to say A[i, :, :], > > you can just say A[i].). However, the maintainers spoke against this, > > so these functions need different names. > > Understandable... but a pity, really. yeah... > Uh, oh. That'

Re: name an array function

2016-11-21 Thread tomas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:32:28AM +0100, Daniel Llorens wrote: > > Hello, > > version 2.2 of Guile will (I hope) include rank-polymorphic versions > of array-ref, array-set! and array-for-each. What this means is that > instead of requiring as many

Re: name an array function

2016-11-21 Thread Stefan Israelsson Tampe
array-sub maybe, On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Daniel Llorens wrote: > > Hello, > > version 2.2 of Guile will (I hope) include rank-polymorphic versions of > array-ref, array-set! and array-for-each. What this means is that instead > of requiring as many indices as the rank of the array, wit

name an array function

2016-11-21 Thread Daniel Llorens
Hello, version 2.2 of Guile will (I hope) include rank-polymorphic versions of array-ref, array-set! and array-for-each. What this means is that instead of requiring as many indices as the rank of the array, with these functions you can give fewer indices and get a subarray (a ‘prefix slice’).