At Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:51:42 -0500, Eli Barzilay wrote: > A few minutes ago, Jay McCarthy wrote: > > I agree with Eli. first is not car and shouldn't be treated as it. > > > > car : (Cons a b) -> a > > first : (List a) -> a > > Right -- it's a different type, and the `list?' check adds a cost. > > I don't have too much problem with how they are now -- it's just that > moving them to the base language makes it easier to think that they're > the same thing, even more in the presence of the CL thing (where they > are the same).
`racket/base' already has both `pair?' and `list?', and I don't think anyone is getting confused. `#lang racket' has all of them, and that does not seem to cause any issues either. I could amend my patch to move the documentation of `first' and `rest' with the other list operations in `racket/base' (`length', `list-ref', etc.) instead of with `car' and `cdr'. Do you think that would help? Vincent _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
