>>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DS> At 4:19 PM +0000 1/24/02, Dave Mitchell wrote: >> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> That was my biggest objection. I like the thought of having a scheme >>> pair data type. The interpreter should see it, and it should be >>> accessed, as a restricted array, one with only two entries. >> >> Is this then the same datatype as a Perl6 pair (cf '=>' op in Apo 3) ?? DS> Good point. it probably is, yes. (Though there may be potential DS> differences--depends on whether the scheme pair can only have scalars DS> on each side, or should allow other things) that can be handled by the compiler to some degree. and from my lisp knowledge, a dotted pair can contain anything in each node. so i expect scheme pairs to map nicely onto perl6 pairs. this implies that pairs should be supported directly in parrot since you can do many optimizations knowing the array has only 2 elements. maybe even support some car/cdr depth variations? i don't see any perl use of cddar but who knows? uri -- Uri Guttman ------ [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------- http://www.stemsystems.com -- Stem is an Open Source Network Development Toolkit and Application Suite - ----- Stem and Perl Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding ---- Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org
