From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4583 invoked by alias); 8 Jun 2004 03:10:20 -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 4576 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2004 03:10:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO rwcrmhc13.comcast.net) (204.127.198.39) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 8 Jun 2004 03:10:19 -0000 Received: from [67.172.156.222] (c-67-172-156-222.client.comcast.net[67.172.156.222]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc13) with SMTP id <2004060803101501500mj9e1e>; Tue, 8 Jun 2004 03:10:16 +0000 Subject: Re: (remove) doesn't work From: Eric McDonald To: mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca Cc: Jim Kingdon , xconq7@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1086664034.1481.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 03:10:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg00518.txt.bz2 On Wed, 2004-05-19 at 15:08, mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > On Wed, 19 May 2004, Jim Kingdon wrote: > > Yeah. The only thing that spring to my mind is whether xconq has > > lists of lists, and whether you'd want > > > > remove (c d) from (a b (c d) e) to return (a b e) > > > > Off the top of my head I don't even remember whether xconq has lists > > of lists, much less whether the above functionality is important. > > I'm sure xconq has lists of lists, but it seems to me that if you want to > remove (c d) from (a b (c d) e) and return (a b e), you should use > > (remove ((c d)) (a b (c d) e)) > > not > > (remove (c d) (a b (c d) e)) . I just looked at a Common Lisp reference, and it sides with Jim's interpretation of the 'remove' keyword. Not that we have to follow Lisp or anything.... Perhaps we could implement a separate 'remove-list' keyword, which would follow your suggestion (and probably be more useful for GDL). If we assume that order of atoms in the two lists need not match, then the operation will effectively be O(n^2), which is probably not a big deal, since it would only be used during game module interpretation. Eric