From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: bug#17485: [PATCH 1/3] Let length+ return the length of dotted lists rather than #f Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 12:09:16 +0200 Message-ID: <87vbsh6l6b.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87y4y6t0or.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <1401821778-19972-1-git-send-email-dak@gnu.org> <87wqcxtk65.fsf@yeeloong.lan> <877g4x8e5p.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1401876622 20899 80.91.229.3 (4 Jun 2014 10:10:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 10:10:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 17485@debbugs.gnu.org To: Mark H Weaver Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 04 12:10:12 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ws896-0000bc-C7 for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 12:10:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59222 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ws895-0007fK-Os for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 06:10:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41609) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ws890-0007XC-Gd for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 06:10:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ws88w-00035U-JN for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 06:10:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:44226) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ws88w-000355-GJ for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 06:10:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Ws88v-0004Ui-SF for bug-guile@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 06:10:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: David Kastrup Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 10:10:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 17485 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 17485-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B17485.140187656817207 (code B ref 17485); Wed, 04 Jun 2014 10:10:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 17485) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jun 2014 10:09:28 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43103 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Ws88J-0004TL-Kr for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 06:09:27 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:41006 ident=Debian-exim) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Ws88D-0004T5-K3 for 17485@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 06:09:21 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48311 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ws88C-0005zl-Kp; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 06:09:16 -0400 Original-Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4AE5CE04DE; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 12:09:16 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <877g4x8e5p.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (David Kastrup's message of "Wed, 04 Jun 2014 06:57:54 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:7493 Archived-At: David Kastrup writes: >> Otherwise, this function looks good to me, but I'd prefer to give it a >> new name and move it into list.c, rather than extending SRFI-1's >> 'length+'. It's not an "extension" of SRFI-1's length+: it just does the same as the SRFI-1 reference implementation. It is just a different choice of working with unspecified behavior than yours. >> Hmm, coming up with names is hard. Maybe 'length*'? > > Given what cons* (and use of id* in syntax rules) does, the name seems > inappropriate. length* would be a good name for > > (length* clist1 clist* ... ) > > returns the length of the shortest finite list in the given lists, #f > if there is none. Which would be actually a rather nice building > block to have for several srfi-1 functions and would basically not > make us need length+ at all in its implementation. And that's actually the core of the argument: do we really want to offer a "length+" that is at best marginally useful for srfi-1 itself? For a library design, that sounds a lot like "does not eat its own dog food". Are we really doing users a favor by filling in the "unspecified" corners of the srfi-1 in a manner not making for a coherent whole? -- David Kastrup