On 2020-08-20 12:03 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 11:51 AM Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <
> xxxxxx@nieper-wisskirchen.de> wrote:
>
> > I have been concerned about the
> > "bitvector<->bytevector" procedures, which currently only use
> > big-endian order according to the document.
> >
>
> Ah.  This is more difficult.  When packing (implicitly big-endian)
> bitvectors into bytevectors, it is not so clear where the padding bits go.
> Strict reversal would put them in byte 0, but the last byte would also be a
> plausible place.

I'll add this if we want it and can agree on the semantics.

I'll make the following changes shortly.

* Allow multiple seeds in bitvector-unfold(-right)
* Add reverse-bitvector->vector/{bool,int} and reverse-vector->bitvector

--
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe  <xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz>

"Prolonged contact with the computer turns mathematicians into
clerks and vice-versa." --Alan J. Perlis