Re: Scheme style auto-resizing hashtable (fwd)

[Tel <telford@eng.uts.edu.au>]

> > My table-remove! and index-remove! have optional arguments, if you
> > only supply one argument (the table) they delete everything, as you
> > supply more args they get more selective. I'm still wondering if this
> > use for optional arguments is clever or just confusing.
> 
> sounds a bit dangerous, consider
> 
> (apply dictionary-clear! lst)
> 
> the user means for "lst" to be (my-dictionary #t) or whatever, but
> mistakenly has it set to just (my-dictionary) 

Hmmm, I see justice in this argument, so blah-remove! should take out
just a single item and blah-clear! should take out all items.

> here's a new list of dictionary procedures
> 
> constructors:
> 
>         make-dictionary
>         make-dictionaryv
>         make-dictionaryq
> 
> behavior modifiers:
> 
>         dictionary-enable! 
>         dictionary-disable!
>         dictionary-change-type!
> 
> the big three basic operations:
> 
>         dictionary-insert!
>         dictionary-lookup
>         dictionary-remove!
> 
> iterators and friends:
> 
>         dictionary-map                <-> ???
>         dictionary-foreach            <-> ???
> 	dictionary-make-iterator  -- perhaps add an "auto-grow"
> 				  -- option to be toggled off until
> 				  -- iterator is finished
> 	call-with-dictionary-iterator
> 
> dictionary to whatever conversions:
> 
> 	dictionary->alist           -- was dictionary->items
> 	dictionary->keys  
> 	dictionary->values
> 
> whatever to dictionary "conversions":
> 
> 	dictionary-insert-alist!
> 	dictionary-consume-alist!  -- delete alist while
> 				   -- inserting pairs (to conserve memory)
> 	dictionary-insert-dictionary!
> 	dictionary-consume-dictionary! -- delete buckets while 
>                                        -- inserting entries
> 
> statistics:
> 	
> 	dictionary-stats
> 	dictionary-more-stats
> 
> the rest:
> 
>         dictionary-clear!
>         dictionary-copy!

These all look pretty good to me.

Just a very fanciful suggestion: Is it possible to combine
``dictionary-insert-alist!'' and ``dictionary-insert-dictionary!''
into ``dictionary-insert!'' such that (dictionary-inset! D fred)
will look at the type of fred and modify it's behaviour accordingly?
Am I getting carried away here? Is someone likely to want a dictionary
of dictionaries?

I like the idea of the consumers, it should be a big saving on garbage
generation. 

	- Tel