[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CL package serious deficiencies

From: Juanma Barranquero
Subject: Re: CL package serious deficiencies
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:08:37 +0100

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 15:38, Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:

> I've used incf occasionally, but don't find it terribly important.

Is not terribly important, but it is more expresive than (setq x (1+
x)) when x is this-very-longish-variable-whose-name-will-never-really-end,
and you have too look closely to be sure that the second instance
isn't really this-other-very-longish-variable-whose-name-will-not-end-either.

Another one I use a lot is pushnew.

> That's the big one: some kind of "filter elements based on a predicate"
> is really handy and we definitely need to have this in core Elisp.

Yes, definitely.

> OTOH I don't like the -if-not/-if duplication nor all the keyword
> arguments it takes

The -if/-if-not duplication is not needed, but as for the keywords, I
find most of them useful and handy, except perhaps :test-not.

> I think having cl-position (after (require 'cl-lib)) is good enough for
> this one (it's handy and more readable than the Elisp replacement, but
> it's not used often).

Agreed that position is less versatile than remove* or
delete-duplicates, but that's a bit self-defeating. Many of these
functions, position included, would get more use if they were better


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]