-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Decide distinction string vs. bytevector is a hard-requirement #143
Comments
By way of a quick test, Bigloo 4.3h differentiates between strings and bytevectors, but it uses the name "u8vector" (SRFI 4) instead of "bytevector" (RnRS):
Not sure whether this is the case using all compiler backends (if I understood correctly, it has at least C and JVM backends, plus an interpreter). It currently seems to be missing specifically:
The manual https://www-sop.inria.fr/indes/fp/Bigloo/manual.html says:
|
@manuel-serrano: Do you have plans to add bytevector procedures with standard (R6RS/R7RS) names in the future? |
Yup, Bigloo has and is exposed to the C backend. It is no matter which naming used (ie. SRFI-4 u8vector vs. RnRS bytevector) since Yuni can provide wrapper for it. The whole point is SRFI-4 is not on the "supported SRFI" list of the manual. I guess it's because of Java backend but anyway it won't play well with existing Bigloo tooling; in Bigloo library, most binary related procedures take |
Unfortunately, Bigloo lacks string vs. bytevector distinction. Previously, MIT/GNU Scheme also fallen into this area but recent MIT/GNU Scheme 10 gained this.
So far, Bigloo is only (actively-developed) Scheme that lacks this.
Bigloo lacks:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: