[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Scheme-reports] No (bytevector n ...) ?

Alex Shinn scripsit:

On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Christian Stigen Larsen
<csl@x> wrote:
> is there no procedure to create bytevectors beyond using the reader syntax
> #u8(n ...).  Will there be a (bytevector n ...) constructor in the final
> R7RS?

> This seems to be a oversight - we actually use `bytevector'
> in a number of the examples.  I'll bring this up with the
> members.

The oversight was using it in the examples.  Version 4 of BlobAPI, which
is what we voted for in the first and second ballots, contained this

    Because there is no preferred way to interpret the data in a blob,
    there is no `blob` function analogous to `list` or `vector` and no
    second argument to `make-blob`.

However, when we overrode the second part in the third ballot (ticket #215)
and added a second optional argument to `make-blob` (now `make-bytevector`),
we didn't reconsider the first part.

I have added ticket #471 and copied the WG1 list on this reply.
John Cowan <cowan@x>             http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Pour moi, les villes du Silmarillion ont plus de réalité que Babylone.
		--Christopher Tolkien, as interviewed by Le Monde

Scheme-reports mailing list