Hi Alex, When you change the behaviour of a function, I would expect you to mention it in the CHANGES file. I can see no mention of this ‘for’ change/fix under "30nov12 picoLisp-3.1.1” …
What was your motivation for this ‘for’ change? /Jon On 17. Apr, 2014, at 08:00, Alexander Burger <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Christophe, > > thanks for the input! :) > > >> 1) Regarding this snippet: (for ((I . N) 11 (not (= I 4)) (inc N)) (list I >> N)) >> the official PicoLisp and ersatz 27 return (4 14), >> but ersatz 29 (currently the most recent version) returns (3 13). > > Correct. This was fixed a while ago, on Tue Oct 02 09:16:10 2012 > (Increment 'for' counter before the condition). > > But while testing this, I found the miniPicoLisp was faulty here. I > fixed and uploaded it now. > > > >> 2) Regarding the sort function, ersatz (both versions) is OK with >> (let L (3 'Y "Y" 'X 3 "X" NIL) (sort L)) >> but throws a java.lang.StackOverflow with >: >> (let L (3 'Y "Y" 'X 3 "X" NIL) (sort L >)) > > Oops, yes! I've fixed it. It is now in 3.1.6.5 JVM. > > Thanks again! > ♪♫ Alex PԔ � &j)m����X��� ��zV�u�.n7�
