[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
was Re: strings rationale
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
was Re: strings rationale |
Date: |
Wed, 15 Aug 2001 15:13:51 -0700 (PDT) |
After reading this thread, I have to say that I really don't like the
idea of symbols being transparently interchangable in *any* context
with strings. Some of the arguments I've heard in favor of this
^^^^^
change sound like they could also be used to argue for the
interchangability of integers and strings
This question is already answered in the message to which you are
selectively replying.
- performance? Consider future compilation optimizations
This argument doesn't really hold up, but it does point to a
long-standing problem about Guile design discussions on mailing lists,
which I'll probably address in a future message.
-t
- Re: making up language features, (continued)
- Re: making up language features, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2001/08/15
- Re: strings rationale, Marius Vollmer, 2001/08/06
- Re: strings rationale, Eric E Moore, 2001/08/07
- Re: strings rationale, Alex Shinn, 2001/08/06
- Re: strings rationale, Marius Vollmer, 2001/08/06
- Re: strings rationale, Rob Browning, 2001/08/15
- was Re: strings rationale,
Tom Lord <=