Neil Conway wrote:
> On 23-Mar-04, at 7:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > No, lcons is one of the names that I think we should stick with on
> > historical grounds. It's widely used in the backend and it has the
> > right connotations for anyone who's ever used Lisp.
>
> I think it has exactly the *wrong* connotations: the name suggests that
> it creates a new cons cell (along with the ensuing implications about
> performance and the internal implementation of the list), which is no
> longer the case.
>
> How about lprepend()? That allows for some symmetric with lappend().
Wow, I like that one!
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
