[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence'
From: |
Kenichi Handa |
Subject: |
Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence' |
Date: |
Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:18:58 +0900 (JST) |
User-agent: |
SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.2 (Yagi-Nishiguchi) APEL/10.2 Emacs/21.2.92 (sparc-sun-solaris2.6) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) |
In article <address@hidden>, "Satyaki Das" <address@hidden> writes:
>> >> (defun dev-charseq (from &optional to)
>> >> (if (null to) (setq to from))
>> >> (mapcar (function (lambda (x) (indian-glyph-char x 'devanagari)))
>> >> (devanagari-range from to)))
>>
>> > (defun dev-charseq (lower &optional upper)
>> > (if (null upper) (setq upper lower))
>> > (loop for x from lower to upper
>> > collect (indian-glyph-char x 'devanagiri)))
>>
>> It's not the point. How to use a list returned by `range'
>> (or `sequence') and how to make such a list is a different
>> thing.
> I am trying to show that by using existing macros and functions we
> can express the algorithms as clearly and succintly as with the
> new `range'.
In your example code, you united the implementaion of range
and usage of the returned list. In such a way, of course,
it is natural that we can make a function that uses `range'
more concise and efficient.
> Do you have a counter-example to this?
How about the code something like this.
(defvar dev-consonants
(append (range (decode-char 'ucs #x0915) (decode-char 'ucs #x0939))
(range (decode-char 'ucs #x0958) (decode-char 'ucs #x095F))))
(defun dev-looking-at-syllable ()
(and (memq (following-char) dev-consonants)
(looking-at dev-syllable-pattern)))
The first `memq' is to avoid the heavy `looking-at' in an
unnecessary case.
The defvar part can be written as:
(defvar dev-consonants
(append (loop for x from (decode-char 'ucs #x0915) to (decode-char 'ucs
#x0939)
collect x)
(loop for x from (decode-char 'ucs #x0958) to (decode-char 'ucs
#x095F)
collect x)))
but using `range' is much more handy and easier to read.
> IMO, a new builtin function is needed if and only if it makes
> writing code easier or makes it simpler.
I'm not requesting a builtin function. And, `range' surely
makes writing code easier and makes the code simpler as well
as dolist, dotimes, while, and etc. do.
> I think calling the new function `sequence' or `range' is a
> mistake. Lisp already has the functions `string' and `vector'
> which are data type constructors. Either of the suggested names
> sound like a new data type (in fact there is already a data type
> called sequence and a predicate sequencep) and so inconsistent
> with the current naming conventions.
I see your point.
> So I suggest that a more descriptive name be chosen -- for
> instance something like `make-sequence-of-numbers'.
I don't insist on having TYPE argument, always returning a
list is ok. So, for instance, make-number-list, is also
acceptable.
---
Ken'ichi HANDA
address@hidden
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', (continued)
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Luc Teirlinck, 2003/03/24
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Kenichi Handa, 2003/03/24
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Luc Teirlinck, 2003/03/24
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Satyaki Das, 2003/03/24
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Kenichi Handa, 2003/03/24
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Satyaki Das, 2003/03/24
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Kenichi Handa, 2003/03/24
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Satyaki Das, 2003/03/25
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Kenichi Handa, 2003/03/25
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Satyaki Das, 2003/03/25
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence',
Kenichi Handa <=
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Satyaki Das, 2003/03/25
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Luc Teirlinck, 2003/03/25
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Edward O'Connor, 2003/03/26
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2003/03/26
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Kenichi Handa, 2003/03/26
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Richard Stallman, 2003/03/26
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Stefan Monnier, 2003/03/25
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Kenichi Handa, 2003/03/25
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Miles Bader, 2003/03/25
- Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence', Luc Teirlinck, 2003/03/25