Hi Alex, > LPP> Is there any sense behind this result? Are NIL values somehow > LPP> special to the secondary indexing mechanism? > > it is somehow special in map-index, and inherently in > GET-INSTANCES-BY-RANGE -- > if start is NIL it starts from beginning, it end is NIL it iterates to the > end, so (NIL, NIL) > range should mean all the sequence.
That's the behaviour per the documentation as I understand it, yes. > LPP> How should I find the missing instances with > LPP> GET-INSTANCES-BY-RANGE? > > question is _why_ should you use GET-INSTANCES-BY-RANGE when > you can do this via GET-INSTANCES-BY-VALUE? Because I need sorting... ideally the NIL values should just be clustered at the end or beginning of the sorted space. Leslie _______________________________________________ elephant-devel site list elephant-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/elephant-devel
