[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Default attributes of copy due to SUBSEQ
- To: common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- Subject: Default attributes of copy due to SUBSEQ
- From: Robert Elton Maas <REM@IMSSS.SU.EDU>
- Date: 1985 March 19 21:23:38 PST (=GMT-8hr)
- Cc: Gall@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
- Reply-to: REM@MIT-MC.ARPA
- Sender: REM%IMSSS@SU-SCORE.ARPA (for undeliverable-mail notifications)
- Sent: to SU-AI.ARPA by IMSSS.? via ETHERNET with PUPFTP; 1985-Mar-19 22:24:02 PST (=GMT-8hr)
> Date: Tuesday, 19 March 1985 13:39-EST
> From: Nick Gall <Gall at MIT-MULTICS.ARPA> (via Fahlman)
> Posted-Date: 19 Mar 85 13:41 EST
> !section 14.1(2) Nick Gall 85-03-19
> !version Digital Press 1984
> !topic Copying arrays
> Although functions such as SUBSEQ state that the copy made of an
> array is of the same type, they say nothing of the two other array
> attributes, fill pointer and adjustable.
> The question is, "Should copied arrays share these attributes
> with their originals, or should they be simple?"
> The answer should be stated in the standard.
I agree completely so far. I would think it would copy those other
attributes, rather than clobber them to SIMPLE when making the copy,
but on the other hand, I'm not really sure.
But clearly the manual should say, and probably an extra argument
should be available to override the default.