Re: Scheme style auto-resizing hashtable (fwd)

[Maciej Stachowiak <mstachow@mit.edu>]

jglascoe@jay.giss.nasa.gov writes:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 1998 Chris.Bitmead@misys.com.au wrote:
> 
> > The bottom line is - I think a hash table should be called hash-table. I
> > think
> > the word "dictionary" should be reserved for some future OO class library,
> > which will probably use hash-table as an implementation.
> 
> Okay, I'm still open minded.  If everyone wants "hash-table", then I'll go
> with "hash-table".  But I still plan on consulting some other languages to
> see (a) what they call their hash tables, and (b) whether any of them
> actually have a data structure named "dictionary" that orders its entries. 
> 

Perl: hash
Tcl: array (not a first-class data structure, but close enough)
Common Lisp: hash-table
MIT Scheme: hash-table

> could we implement the object system in C so that it isn't slow?  that
> would be a good thing.  I'll take a wild guess that STk has a C
> implemented object system (but I still haven't looked at it... someday,
> someday...)
> 

I remember a fair number of mentions that someone was porting the STk
object system to Guile, maybe it will even happen some day.

 - Maciej