Re: [Chicken-users] http cookie order

[Graham Fawcett]

On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Tony Sidaway <address@hidden> wrote:
> Thanks for a very informative analysis.
>
>  Of course this whole problem only cropped up because we Schemers like
>  to build up lists by consing new elements to the front.  I would
>  probably have included a "reverse" in the result of the let loop
>  without thinking,

I think I'm wired the same way. Typing (if (null? lst) (reverse acc)
...) is the path of least resistance!

> but unless you have reason to suspect that attribute
>  order will matter somewhere down the line, that's just wasted CPU
>  cycles and wasted consing.

I don't think I'd worry much about the consing: there are rarely many
attributes in a request, and minor GC would deal with the garbage
quickly and efficiently. It's worth the cost in order to make the
attribute-list "more correct", and Drake has dug up proof that
ordering is significant in the spec.

> Of course, then somebody comes along and
>  writes a hack to update the cookie attribute.. :)

Let's hope they do it with (set-cdr!) and all is well!

Graham