[plt-scheme] cost of closure?

From: Matthew Flatt (mflatt at cs.utah.edu)
Date: Thu May 31 19:49:42 EDT 2007

At Thu, 31 May 2007 16:45:25 -0700, YC wrote:
> Out of curiosity - does PLT scheme actually use struct as the fundamental
> compound type, i.e. implement closure/etc on top of struct. 

The way I think about it, everything is a struct, but some things use a
special-case representation because they're important enough. (The
extreme case is a fixnum).

But an equally valid answer would be: no, not all compound types use
the same representation as values from a struct constructor.

> I like structs
> but have problem with 1) making it anonymous and 2) that make-struct-type is
> cumbersome if define-struct along doesn't cut it.

Agreed. A more complete `define-struct' form is high on the list of
additions for version 4.0.


Posted on the users mailing list.