Re: hash tables

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

Jim Blandy <address@hidden> writes:

> address@hidden (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
> > Python does not have improper lists.  So I'm going to use pairs like
> > ('hash . the-table-itself)
> > to represent Python objects that don't have easy Scheme counterparts.
> > That works as long as the cdr of these pairs is never itself a pair;
> > then it's easy and quick to distinguish these from Python lists.
> 
> Under this representation, to test whether a Guile object represents a
> Python list, you have to say:
> 
>   (or (null? OBJ)
>       (and (pair? OBJ)
>          (or (null? (cdr OBJ))
>                (pair? OBJ))))
> 
> Is that right?

Hrm, pretty much.  

I'm still totally unsettled on the exact type correspondences that
will be set up (right now, I'm debugging the parser [which does most
of the compilation too]).  When I set in to working on the Python
library, then I'll have to settle on exactly what the right type
representations will be.

Do you have a suggestion?  I'm all ears!