Hi, all.
I'm just starting to play with cl-prevalence.
Is there any reason (besides performance, which I know would suffer with EQUAL or EQUALP) why the root-objects hash in a system is EQ?
-- Randall Randall randall@randallsquared.com 'I say we put up a huge sign next to the Sun that says "You must be at least this big (insert huge red line) to ride this ride".' -- tghdrdeath@hotmail.com
On 17 Sep 2004, at 01:26, Randall Randall wrote:
Hi, all.
I'm just starting to play with cl-prevalence.
Is there any reason (besides performance, which I know would suffer with EQUAL or EQUALP) why the root-objects hash in a system is EQ?
I honestly can't remember why I did this, but in CL using symbols as keys is free (as in doesn't cost you anything) *and* it is efficient. I generally use 'managed prevalence' where the root keys are class names (and thus symbols). Why would you want to use a string instead of a symbol ?
Sven
cl-prevalence-devel@common-lisp.net
-
Randall Randall -
Sven Van Caekenberghe