From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Mendler via "Emacs development discussions." Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on' Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 17:23:17 +0100 Message-ID: <87sf2ahm2y.fsf@daniel-mendler.de> References: <170688047526.14693.2994051491358257471@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <20240202132756.4272CC0EFE7@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <87cytej4hy.fsf@daniel-mendler.de> <86zfwi52m1.fsf@gnu.org> <87plxe28as.fsf@web.de> <877cjmj2vo.fsf@daniel-mendler.de> <87jznm26io.fsf@web.de> Reply-To: Daniel Mendler Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="33234"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Michael Heerdegen To: Michael Heerdegen via "Emacs development discussions." Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 02 17:24:33 2024 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 1rVwLB-0008Pa-26 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 17:24:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVwK4-00020Z-KV; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 11:23:24 -0500 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 1rVwK2-00020M-Ir for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 11:23:22 -0500 Original-Received: from server.qxqx.de ([2a01:4f8:c012:9177::1] helo=mail.qxqx.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVwK0-0003gi-L5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 11:23:22 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=daniel-mendler.de; s=key; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date: References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=PGiNCqDSnHuIAuK4ZxqKAGz+KMGOjtHH/jaCM+JNDDM=; b=Wb419D5lHv7dwzmj/lantIKc/V //RUbVcwaSvv1CG2PF/aXflZ+KV3Wog8g5RHVeZecF7zSknC8fYcj/gKfFM78F793mCbgZt2G0bWU TfKBLHyNBhKgG1lDFug8qz/TW+D5VsOP6AGPKD7BD4Hkxnon+2NB7mQECIjh+sNWh0uY=; In-Reply-To: <87jznm26io.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen via's message of "Fri, 02 Feb 2024 17:08:31 +0100") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a01:4f8:c012:9177::1; envelope-from=mail@daniel-mendler.de; helo=mail.qxqx.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:315765 Archived-At: Michael Heerdegen via "Emacs development discussions." writes: > Daniel Mendler via "Emacs development discussions." > writes: > >> Why not seq.el? We already seq-sort in seq.el, so the new function >> could be added there as well. > > Similar opinion as Eli. I don't feel that sorting is a basic sequence > operation. Unlike concatenation, you don't sort streams (lazy lists) > for example. Right. It is not pretty that some operations in seq.el do not generalize to infinite sequences. > It's a corner case like `seq-sort' I don't have a strong opinion about. > I think I would prefer having the function defined somewhere else and, > maybe, use it in the list implementation of a `seq-sort-on' if we really > want it. I would find it better if a similar function is not duplicated in multiple files, which would be the case if both `sort-on' and `seq-sort-on' are added. > But do you really think people often would "sort-on" anything but lists? Yes. Sorting vectors is a useful operation. If the function is not added to seq.el it should maybe operate on the list or vector in a destructive manner for efficiency? In seq.el all operations are non-destructive like John's `sort-on'. Daniel