Re: Possible sub? ref. improvements

[Alexander Burger]

Hi Jon,

 I added the 'g' to make it clear that 'sub?' doesn’t only check the
 tail, like offset does. If you insist on leaving the 'g' out, you must
 at least adjust the results accordingly. ;-)

Oops :) OK, then I better add the 'g' everywhere.

♪♫ Alex
-- 
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Re: Possible sub? ref. improvements

[Jon Kleiser]

Hi Alex,

I added the 'g' to make it clear that 'sub?' doesn’t only check the tail, like 
offset does. If you insist on leaving the 'g' out, you must at least adjust the 
results accordingly. ;-)

/Jon

On 14. Nov, 2014, at 07:42, Alexander Burger a...@software-lab.de wrote:

 Hi Jon,
 
 From what I can see at code.google.com, you missed the last 'g' in
 both of my expressions.
 
 Why is the 'g' important? I omitted it on purpose, to keep the new
 examples ananlog to the old ones above them.
 
 And also I think you forgot the additions
 ('sub?') I suggested to the See also on 'offset' and 'index'.
 
 Right. Thanks! I've added them. Also to 'head'.
 
 ♪♫ Alex