Re: member inconsistency?

[Fabrice Popineau]

2016-02-01 12:04 GMT+01:00 Richard Stallman <address@hidden>:

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > It makes it harder to catch the bug if you
  > inadvertently call member with its second
  > argument not being a sequence ?

There are two ways to look at this:

* Lists should end in nil, and if they don't, functions should complain.

* It is useful generality if functions accept lists that end
in some other atom.

I don't see that the first is obviously preferable.

I'm biased by CL I guess.

Then you need 2 functions, one for proper lists and one for improper lists. 

But I would call the second one `tree-member' :-)

Greetings,

Fabrice