[WIP] Feature/listp #51
Conversation
| @@ -1276,6 +1276,9 @@ CDR_SAFE (Lisp_Object c) | |||
| Lisp_Object Fsetcar(Lisp_Object, Lisp_Object); | |||
| Lisp_Object Fsetcdr(Lisp_Object, Lisp_Object); | |||
| Lisp_Object Fcar(Lisp_Object); | |||
| Lisp_Object Fatom(Lisp_Object, Lisp_Object); | |||
| Lisp_Object Flistp(Lisp_Object, Lisp_Object); | |||
| Lisp_Object Fnlistp(Lisp_Object, Lisp_Object); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are functions of one argument, which is why the compile is failing on Travis.
| @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ | |||
| use std::os::raw::c_char; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since lists are just collections of cons cells, I propose that we move these functions into cons.rs. We could move Fatom into cons.rs too.
| Slistp, | ||
| 1, 1, | ||
| ptr::null(), | ||
| "Return t if OBJECT is a list, that is, a cons cell or nil. Otherwise, return nil."); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's probably worth adding (fn OBJECT) at the end of the docstring, or *Help* will just show (listp ARG).
|
Maybe also will be better to move |
|
@0xAX aha, I suggested something similar :). Since we're organising functions by type, I think we should either have a cons.rs or a list.rs, but not both. I don't feel strongly as to which. |
fully agree.
as for me - +1 for list.rs :) |
mfeckie
force-pushed
the
feature/listp
branch
from
27de6c2
to
f829daf
Compare
mfeckie
force-pushed
the
feature/listp
branch
from
0abe913
to
a6ff1b4
Compare
|
@Wilfred Finally got back to this, sorry for the delay. Wanted to make sure everything was up to date with master. Travis is now green |
This follows on from the
feature/atombranch, so some of the changes here will disappear once (if) that gets merged.Had to bump libc because of compiler complaints around panic vs abort