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] |
>I don't think it make sense to look up the current setter for car N >times inside some loop, when I know that I'm never going to redefine >it. But if YOU know that you will never re-define it, then why opt for a generic mechanism like setf? Just use (set-foo... ) instead. If you don't think things should be looked up N times inside some loop, then I guess you don't like OO things in general, because it's all about dynamically looking up types at run-time. I can't see too much point in having this wonderful generic mechanism if it's just pretending to be generic and in reality it is all static. I think the wonderful thing about Scheme is that most things are designed to be the right thing from a design point of view, and only once that is decided does someone else worry about how to implement it efficiently. Look at call/cc. Wonderful idea, but not very easy to implement. I think that's just fine. Design first. Efficiency is second.