[plt-scheme] Native code generation and immutable pairs

From: Gregory Woodhouse (gregory.woodhouse at sbcglobal.net)
Date: Sun Feb 12 00:47:31 EST 2006

On Feb 11, 2006, at 9:01 PM, Robby Findler wrote:

> My sense is that we occasionally need mutation, but we get a lot by
> giving it up (and there's always mutable pairs and mutable records via
> define-struct in some variation that's not going away). But, I'm just
> speaking for myself.

How is define-struct implmented internally? Where would I look?

Right off the top of my head, the only real options I can think of  
are as a pair or as a closure.  Defining structures as  closures  
seems slick, but I have no feel for how practical it might be.  
Internally, it seems to me that a closure is likely to end up being  
something like a hash table associated with an expression, so it  
would probably as efficient to work with as anything. Hmm...

Gregory Woodhouse
gregory.woodhouse at sbcglobal.net

"Good acts are like good poems. One may easily get their drift, but  
they are not rationally understood."
--Albert Einstein

Posted on the users mailing list.