From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26600 invoked by alias); 19 May 2004 00:30:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26592 invoked from network); 19 May 2004 00:30:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO rwcrmhc11.comcast.net) (204.127.198.35) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 19 May 2004 00:30:39 -0000 Received: from [67.172.156.222] (c-67-172-156-222.client.comcast.net[67.172.156.222]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id <2004051900303801300a314me>; Wed, 19 May 2004 00:30:38 +0000 Subject: Re: (remove) doesn't work From: Eric McDonald To: mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca Cc: xconq7@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1084926540.1485.53.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 00:30:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg00342.txt.bz2 Hi Matthew, On Tue, 2004-05-18 at 16:12, mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > As far as I can tell, the (remove) form simply returns its second argument > instead of doing its job. Test case attached - this will fail regardless > because of the lack of terrain types, but it'll also give an error about > trying to match a length-7 list with another list that should also be > length-7 but is in fact length-10. The only shipped game module using > (remove) is tailhook.g. I haven't figured out whether (remove) is > misbehaving in that file, but it definitely misbehaves in my test case. I would definitely agree that 'remove' is broken, at least relative to its documentation. I too tried to use it once, but it was not giving the desired behavior, so I took a less convenient route that went around it. I didn't mention anything at the time, because I thought it was just some aspect of lispy behavior that I didn't fully comprehend (perhaps this business about only being able to remove atoms rather than lists). So, I guess the questions are, should it be able to remove lists? (It would certainly be nice, since that is the way most people, myself included, would want to use it) And, if so, how difficult would that functionality be to add into the GDL parser? Hopefully someone will have some insight into these questions, because otherwise I am going to have to do some more "context gathering". Regards, Eric