Agreed, though it should be called STRING-HEAD! and take only two arguments.
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Taylor R Campbell<[email protected]> wrote: > Rather than changing each instance of SET-STRING-MAXIMUM-LENGTH! to > check whether it worked and to use SUBSTRING if it failed, perhaps it > would be better to add a SUBSTRING! procedure to do this. > > > _______________________________________________ > MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel > _______________________________________________ MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel
