Hi Tomas, > I see that you take big pain to optimize things a lot. I would
Not intentionally ;-) I don't really mind so much about the actual performance, but more about the underlying principles. And I feel that it is not the "right thing" to waste a cell at each primitive iteration through a loop. To tell the truth, in the past I was thinking a few times about a way to access the counter in 'do'. Not the syntax you proposed, but of a function like (i) that returns a copy of the current counter. But in the end I thought it is not a good idea to overload 'do' in such a way. Also, in Lisp the loop index is usually of much less importance than in languages like C or Java, where iterating arrays with an index variable is a very frequent operation. Do you really think you would need such a feature often? > much better than saying > > (for (I 1 (<= I 5) (inc I)) (print I) "finished") I also don't like that (but fortunately did not often need it). How about (let I 0 (do 5 (print (inc 'I)) "finished")) At least, explicit constructs with 'for' or 'let' give us more flexibility. Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
