Subject: Re: bug#69709: `sort` interface improvement and universal ordering predicate

From: Mattias Engdegård <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2024 16:56:37 +0100

10 mars 2024 kl. 16.48 skrev Dmitry Gutov <[email-masked]>:

> Here's a concern: a lot of existing code is written with either mutability in mind (the source list is a throwaway one, owned by the caller), or coupled with copy-sequence already.
> 
> If the new 'sort' default to non-destructive, wouldn't that make those existing callsites slower? Or at least some of them.

No, with the old calling convention they would get destructive (in-place) sorting. There should be no incompatibilities at all.