GNU bug report logs - #44205
[PATCH] Add new function seq-remove-item

Previous Next

Full log

Message #30 received at control <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: "Basil L. Contovounesios" <contovob <at> tcd.ie>
Cc: 44205 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Subject: Re: bug#44205: [PATCH] Add new function seq-remove-item
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:17:53 -0800

tags 44205 wontfix
close 44205
thanks

Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se> writes:

> "Basil L. Contovounesios" <contovob <at> tcd.ie> writes:
>
>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> writes:
>>
>>> Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se> writes:
>>>
>>>> I found myself reaching for a version of `seq-remove' where I don't have
>>>> to supply a lambda but can just give an item.  Ergo, the attached.
>>>>
>>>>     (seq-remove-item 2 '(1 2 3))  => (1 3)
>>>>
>>>> I find it a whole lot nicer than:
>>>>
>>>>     (seq-remove (lambda (a) (= a 2)) '(1 2 3))  => (1 3)
>>>
>>> Isn't this just
>>>
>>> (remove 2 '(1 2 3)) => (1 3)
>>>
>>> though?  I don't think seq.el needs to replicate the basic list
>>> functions...
>>
>> I think the idea is that seq.el functions are generic and can thus be
>> extended to work with e.g. streams[1].
>
> That was the idea, yes.
>
> It is fairly minor even in my use, so I have no qualms with just closing
> this as wontfix if people think it's not worthwhile enough to add.

It seems like there was no great enthusiasm for this change.  I'm
therefore closing this bug report.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.