Re: elisp code to list interactive functions

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> Nope.  I did provide a patch which introduced a separate type for
> obarrays, but it come with some rough corners, and in any case it
> introduces a backward incompatibility with fairly limited advantages, so
> it's not clear it's a good idea.
>
> But until such a thing is done, we can't reliably distinguish an obarray
> from a vector.

The advantages are fairly limited, but it feels like obarrays are such a
strange little corner of Emacs Lisp, and it'd be really cool to have it,
like, becoming a more well-behaved citizen.

> This said, an obarray is fundamentally unordered, so it would be odd for
> `seq.el` to support it.

Er, yes.  `map-filter' er could support it, though (if it could
distinguish it).

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no