tags 35546 + patch
thanks

On Tue, 07 May 2019 12:50:38 -0400
npostavs@gmail.com wrote:

> Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes:
>
>>>     (setf (logand PLACE #x0F) V)
>
>> Anyway, there is no reason that the setter currently does not
>> return V, right?
>
> I can't see any compelling reason to return the whole PLACE value after
> update, so I guess it's just oversight.  So yeah, it should return V
> just like the setters for `cl-subseq' and `nth' return the new value,
> not the whole sequence.

I noticed `substring' had the same problem.

Patch fixing that, together with cond and logand, attached.

-- 
Štěpán