> BTW: 'new' for lists exists mainly because of generic
> interface.  However normally after 'new' aggregate
> is modified.  In case of lists in almost all cases it
> will be more efficient to create list in incremental way
> using desired values instead of modification.

You do have a point, I briefly checked there's not
many usage of new$List.

> BTW2: If you are worried that [...] is slower than
> MAKELIST you should rather work on increasing speed
> of list comprehesion (that is [....]).  Current
> version constructs list in reverse order and then
> destructively reverses the result.

It is possible to avoid the NREVERSE call?
Unless you do it by recursion and risk the stack
to explode?

What's your opinion on removing IndexedList?

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to fricas-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to fricas-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to