On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> wrote:

> ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
> > Nala Ginrut <nalaginrut@gmail.com> skribis:
> >
> >> +(define (hash-keys table)
> >> +  "Return all the keys from hash table."
> >> +  (hash-map->list (lambda (x y) x) table))
> >
> > That doesn’t seem sufficiently common to warrant a new procedure.  WDYT?
>
> FWIW, I think it would be reasonable to add 'hash-keys'.  Many users
> are accustomed to writing in a style that's made more convenient by
> 'hash-keys', and in cases where efficiency is not crucial, I think
> it's a fine style.  Also, sometimes the values aren't needed.
>
> IMO, we can afford to add a few conveniences such as this.
>
>
Thanks for saying that.
And please consider 'hash-items' implemented with hash-count, it's common
as well.

And I'm not sure about hash-size myself, I won't insist on it.

Thanks!


>       Mark
>
>