Re: User-reserved element in byte code vectors

[Miles Bader]

On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 10:03:24AM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
> All else being equal, I would rather use bytecode objects than vectors
> for something funcallable.

What I'm proposing -- `curried functions' -- are not related to bytecode
objects at all, they may simply be used as a (more general) alternative to
the functionality Lars was trying to accomplish by stuffing stuff into
bytecode vectors.

Because they are more general (and indeed are generally very useful), I think
they're a better solution than a special-case hack for bytecode objects.

If you just don't like vectors being funcallable, then of course (e.g.)
another special-purpose vector type could be used instead.  However it would
be nice if it were printable, and if users could set/access the elements
easily; by using standard vectors, these things come for free.

-Miles
-- 
I'm beginning to think that life is just one long Yoko Ono album; no rhyme
or reason, just a lot of incoherent shrieks and then it's over.  --Ian Wolff