vector->range issues
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(01 Sep 2020 19:21 UTC)
|
Re: vector->range issues
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(01 Sep 2020 19:28 UTC)
|
Re: vector->range issues
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(01 Sep 2020 20:52 UTC)
|
Re: vector->range issues
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(02 Sep 2020 05:48 UTC)
|
Re: vector->range issues
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(02 Sep 2020 07:57 UTC)
|
string-range
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(02 Sep 2020 13:14 UTC)
|
Re: string-range
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(02 Sep 2020 14:50 UTC)
|
Re: string-range
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(02 Sep 2020 15:01 UTC)
|
Re: string-range
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(02 Sep 2020 15:56 UTC)
|
Re: string-range
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(02 Sep 2020 15:58 UTC)
|
Re: string-range
John Cowan
(02 Sep 2020 21:12 UTC)
|
Re: string-range
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(02 Sep 2020 21:16 UTC)
|
Re: string-range
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(02 Sep 2020 21:25 UTC)
|
Re: vector->range issues Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (02 Sep 2020 14:46 UTC)
|
On 2020-09-02 09:57 +0200, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen wrote: > > Rename it to > > > > ivector->range > > > > ? > > Better suggestion: > > (vector-range VECTOR) > > wraps VECTOR in a range. > > (vector->range VECTOR) > > copies the vector first. > > The naming vector-range is consistent with numeric-range and other > range-constructors we may conceive in the future. I agree that vector-range is essentially a constructor, while vector->range is a conversion, so I like this idea. (I also considered the possibility of calling the non-copying form vector->range!, but it's not quite a linear update procedure--future use of the vector argument is valid, but must be read-only.) Added to my repository. -- Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe <xxxxxx@sigwinch.xyz> "Fools ignore complexity. Pragmatists suffer it. Some can avoid it. Geniuses remove it." --Alan J. Perlis