[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Announcing the first actually stable release of guile-for-loops
From: |
Arne Babenhauserheide |
Subject: |
Re: Announcing the first actually stable release of guile-for-loops |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Jan 2020 09:16:38 +0100 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 26.1 |
Hi,
Linus Björnstam <address@hidden> writes:
> The syntax is more or less the same as racket's loops, and they are generally
> compatible. The code generated is for almost all cases as fast as hand-rolled
> code. They are all expressed as left or right folds, and are as such (apart
> from for/list, but read about that in the documentation) free of mutation.
> They are all converted to named lets.
That’s cool!
> (define (erathostenes n)
> (define vec (make-vector n #t))
> (for/list ([i (in-range 2 n)] #:when (vector-ref vec i))
> (for ([j (in-range/incr (* 2 i) n i)])
> (vector-set! vec j #f))
> i))
>
> The code and documentation is available here:
> https://hg.sr.ht/~bjoli/guile-for-loops
Is there a chance that this could get included in Guile (ice-9
for-loops?) and become a SRFI?
If the code is non-portable (I guess the #:keywords are), the two
existing implementations (Racket, Guile) would still be sufficient for a
SRFI.
Best wishes,
Arne
--
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein
ohne es zu merken