Re: srfi-1 take and drop

[Rob Browning]

Kevin Ryde <address@hidden> writes:

> The only difference I could spot in the current implementations was
> list-head and list-tail throw an exception for negative n, where take
> and drop code quietly treat that as 0.  srfi-1 doesn't say anything
> about negatives as far as I can tell, so presumably there's a free
> choice.

I was planning on doing a little hacking on srfi-1.scm too, and I'd
thought about checking and throwing an error on negative n for various
functions, but I hadn't decided.  One thing I was planning to do was
alter null-list? to be less careful.  The spec doesn't require it, and
what we do now is more expensive.

-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592  F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4