Re: Stream implementation of seq-mapn

[Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de>]

Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr> writes:

> > [...]
> > +(cl-defmethod seq-mapn (function (stream stream) &rest streams)
> > +  "Map FUNCTION over the STREAMS.
> I would add to the docstring that all elements of `streams' should be
> streams, otherwise it will default to the generic implementation.

I already had "all the STREAMS must be streams", but that looked weird.


> > +  (if (not (cl-every #'streamp streams))
>                ^^^^^^^^
>                Since this is for stream.el, why not use `seq-every-p'?
> > +      (cl-call-next-method)
> > +    (cl-callf2 cons stream streams)
> > +    (stream-make
> > +     (unless (cl-some #'seq-empty-p streams)
>                  ^^^^^^^
>                  Same question :-)

Ok, done.


> > (1) Is it ok to implement it with `cl-call-next-method' this way?
>
> I guess it is.  Have you tried running `seq-mapn' with a mix of streams
> and lists?

Sure.  I does what I want: the default method is invoked.


Michael.