This is the mail archive of the guile@cygnus.com mailing list for the guile project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
>What is not nice about the first convention is that it is incompatible >with *all* currently existing setters. True, but I think that's tough luck. Whenever you try to generalise something you often find that what you were doing before wasn't abstracted properly. Not a good enough reason to keep doing the wrong thing though. >It is common that the first argument is a data structure. Then one >could use the convention: >(SETTER A1 V A2 ...) > >which would be compatible with set-car!, array-set! and Goops getters. I still think it's conceptually wrong. It wouldn't work for vector-set! for example, which would need to be (SETTER A1 A2 V). Better to go with (SETTER V A1 A2) and be done with it.