[racket] setf in scheme

Razvan Rotaru wrote at 12/30/2010 11:37 AM:
> In what sense would they grow the language? By adding an 
> abstractisation layer, or by building it in the language. 
> It seems to me (correct me if I'm wrong) that implementing such thing 
> in scheme is complex only because scheme does not have lvalues (as 
> things that an expression can be evaluated to, that is).

At (at least) a syntactic level, it's making what were simple getter 
procedures somehow be usable as both getters and setters, and I think 
that complicates the language.  Or changes it substantially.

However, I suspect that implementing this linguistic complication in 
Racket is easy.  I would first try "prop:procedure" in the 
documentation, and a simple notion of lvalues that is used only by "set!".

-- 
http://www.neilvandyke.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20101230/ca2cc3d3/attachment.html>