Re: [Chicken-users] hash-table-walk + hash-table-delete!

[Graham Fawcett]

On 3/5/07, Kon Lovett <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Mar 5, 2007, at 8:47 AM, Zbigniew wrote:
>
> > SRFI-69 appears to provide no guarantee of safety, so for maximum
> > portability (including to future implementations) you might want to
> > iterate manually over a copy of the keys obtained via hash-table-keys.

> Zbigniew is right but you could conditionally expand:
>
> (cond-expand
>    (chicken
>      ... hash-table-walk delete ... )
>    (else
>      ... safe delete ... ) )

Right. (Kon, can I take this to mean that you also think a
"hash-table-walk delete" is safe in the current Chicken
implementation?)

Zbignew wrote:
> I think this is an oversight in SRFI-69.

I agree; it's a surprising omission.

Graham