On 2020/04/13 20:27:34, hanwenn wrote: > On 2020/04/13 20:10:35, dak wrote: > > > https://codereview.appspot.com/561640043/diff/565900043/lily/include/mutable-properties.hh > > File lily/include/mutable-properties.hh (right): > > > > > https://codereview.appspot.com/561640043/diff/565900043/lily/include/mutable-properties.hh#newcode31 > > lily/include/mutable-properties.hh:31: class Iterator { > > On 2020/04/13 17:22:52, hanwenn wrote: > > > On 2020/04/13 17:15:19, Dan Eble wrote: > > > > This is useful, but instead of choosing your own method names, why not > give > > it > > > > an interface consistent with standard iterators (where the semantics > match)? > > > > > > > > https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/named_req/InputIterator > > > > > > > > I'd leave out the key() and value() methods and let it dealing with just a > > > > generic list of SCM values. > > > > > > > > If you implemented enough of the iterator interface, and a class to wrap > the > > > raw > > > > SCM list into an object addressable with begin() and end(), I think you > > would > > > be > > > > able to write range-for statements something like this: > > > > > > > > for (SCM assoc : ly_list(my_alist)) > > > > { > > > > SCM key = scm_car(assoc); > > > > SCM val = scm_cdr(assoc); > > > > ...; > > > > } > > > > > > > > If you're not interested in doing this, I might try it myself. > > > > > > By structuring it like this, you enforce the implementation to store the > > > key/value as SCM cells, which is exactly what we want to get away from. > > > > I don't see that there is a plan to get away from the value being an SCM cell, > > just the key (at least explicitly). Am I overlooking something? > > The value itself is not necessarily a cell. You can have #t as a value (I am > sure you know that.)
Sure. Sorry, I assumed you used "cell" colloquially for "SCM" since it wasn't clear to me that you were talking about the association rather than their components. > Making the Key/value combination a cell forces one to store them as such, or to > construct a cell on the fly. Yes, of course. I thought about key or value being SCM, not about their association being accessible as a pair or other form of cell. > There is an experiment where I store keys as uint16. Sure. https://codereview.appspot.com/561640043/
