I agree. I'm constantly reading the reference of any lisp when dealing with maps, and their descriptions are usually vague. When prototyping I always ignore mapcon and mapcan because I always forget their difference (and because of their destructive nature, which isn't considered functional). El jul 28, 2014 1:11 PM, "Thorsten Jolitz" <tjol...@gmail.com> escribió:
> Alexander Burger <a...@software-lab.de> writes: > > Hi Alex, > > >> I am often confused between the variants of the map functions: map, > >> mapc, mapcar, mapcan, mapcon, maplist. > > > > Yes, indeed. The names of these 6 functions are historic, they are in > > most Lisp variants since early on. > > [...] > > > I hope this clears things up a little. > > Thanks for this nice and short explanation, I'm sure I will use this > post as a reference in the future. > > I would even say that it would make a perfect wiki article! > > ,---- > | Mapping functions in PicoLisp > `---- > > or so .... > > -- > cheers, > Thorsten > > -- > UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe >
