Re: Merging nth, aref, and elt.

[Nicolas Petton]

Stefan Monnier writes:

>> Here's an initial diff for hash-tables. Should it use `get' instead of `elt'?
>
> I think we should probably come up with a library akin to seq.el but
> for mappings (also known as "functions" in set-theory).  It could be
> called map.el, maybe, and the operation could be map-elt?

That would be really nice. subr-x contains some extra hash-tables
functions already and I'm wondering how it should be dealt with without
implementing some functions twice if we were implementing a map.el
library. Should we keep hash-table functions in subr-x and simply alias
them in map.el or remove them from subr-x.el?

Nico
-- 
Nicolas Petton
http://nicolas-petton.fr