Matthias Felleisen writes: > On Oct 22, 2013, at 6:46 AM, Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hin...@fastmail.net> > wrote: > > > structs and vectors once I am in the Typed Racket universe, so I'll > > stick to structs for now. > > Use vectors. At some point, you will want to iterate over these > things or access fields via computation.
That's a good point. Another point in favor of vectors is the possibility to specialize to flvector. On the other hand, there are good arguments for structs as well. Each struct is a distinct type, even if it happens to have the same structure as some other type. I expect to have several types represented by three real numbers, for example, so being able to distinguish them is useful. Using #:transparent structs, I get 1) values printed with type information (good for users) 2) more precise type checking in Typed Racket I also get guaranteed immutability. With vectors, I can always use vector-immutable to make mine, but I can't prevent people from creating mutable vectors, intentionally or by accident, and using them in place of "my" type. Konrad. ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
