From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Shrinking the C core Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 10:18:08 +0200 Message-ID: <87il8betof.fsf@dataswamp.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="32420"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:2e1GL7XIsDposg5ksNYXReBm+fQ= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 15 12:28:07 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qh63R-0008CG-IZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 12:28:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qh62i-0000a1-3I; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 06:27:21 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qh41s-0001Lx-Em for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 04:18:20 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qh41q-0008WA-Nu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 04:18:20 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qh41n-0006rZ-Nz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 10:18:15 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 06:27:10 -0400 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:310596 Archived-At: Arthur Miller wrote: > I am sure they wouldn't have those paires of complementatry > functions (remove-if/remove-if-not) which make for a big > part of CL verbosity too. What is wrong with them? We have them in Elisp as well, `cl-remove-if' and `cl-remove-if-not', both in cl-seq.el. Those functions are pretty useful IMO including use which includes the keywords, all tho that is optional. The only thing negative is the documentation, see for example the docstring of `cl-remove-if-not': Remove all items not satisfying PREDICATE in SEQ. This is a non-destructive function; it makes a copy of SEQ if necessary to avoid corrupting the original SEQ. Keywords supported: :key :count :start :end :from-end As you see, it only says what keywords are "supported", not what they express or how they effect the execution of the function. -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal