RE: map-put! and (setf (map-elt ...) ..) on lists

[Nicolas Petton]

Drew Adams <address@hidden> writes:

>> > Do we have a non-destructive `map-put'?
>> 
>> There's `map-insert'.
>
> My point was that there is no need for a function
> name to signal that the function so named is
> "destructive".  The doc string should do that,
> however.

It can be very important to know that a function is destructive, I don't
think it's a should be seen as an internal detail of the function.  IOW,
I think that whether a function is destructive or not is part of what
the function does, not how it does it.

Nico

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature