[PD] "list foreach"?

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 2014-09-30 17:08, Frank Barknecht wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 03:51:38PM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig
> wrote:
>> On 2014-09-30 12:20, Frank Barknecht wrote:
>>> I see that there now are the rather peculiar "list fromsymbol"
>>> and "list tosymbol" methods in [list], but the much needed
>>> "list foreach" still is missing. Why?
>> 
>> most likely, because yo can do a [list foreach] as a simple 
>> abstraction (if you don't mind another name), while you cannot do
>> a [list tosymbol].
> 
> Okay, I see. But with the same logic, [list length] could be
> considered superfluous.
> 
> list-drip.pd, the equivalent abstraction to "list foreach" in the
> [list]-abs is the most used abstraction in the whole collection.
> Although Matju's implementation is highly optimized, including
> "list foreach" as an interal method would speed things up
> immensely.

+1

fgmsdr
IOhannes
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=apEC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----