[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Order of arguments to sequence :TEST functions
- To: Scott E. Fahlman <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>, common-lisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
- Subject: Order of arguments to sequence :TEST functions
- From: David C. Plummer <DCP@QUABBIN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Mon, 29 Feb 88 13:50 EST
- In-reply-to: <FAHLMAN.12378613904.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 1988 10:57 EST
From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Yes, lots of code would have to be changed (in a trivial way) if we
switched this around now.
I can believe you are right, but here's my reason why I think the amount
of change could be small: The change only affects non-commutative
predicates. Most of the predicates I have used and that I have seen are
commutative, basically EQ, EQL, EQUAL and /=.
I think that an incompatible change like this
has no chance of passing if the reason is just someone's view that the
order of arguments would be more intuitive if switched around.
Here's a quick test/poll. Without using the -IF or -IF-NOT functions,
- Remove all elements of a sequence which are less than 3.
- Find the first element of a sequence which is more than 3.
My "intuition" for coding this gives the wrong answers.
I know this doesn't show anything about language design.