[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: MOON at MIT-MC
- From: Gerald R. Barber <JERRYB at MIT-AI>
- Date: Sat ,19 Apr 80 20:51:00 EDT
cc: BUG-LISPM at MIT-AI
Date: 04/18/80 23:00:10
From: MOON at MIT-MC
To: (BUG LISPM)
Date: 18 APR 1980 1851-EST
From: jerryb at MIT-AI (Gerald R. Barber)
(string-reverse-search-set '(#/a) "abc")
returns 1. instead of 0.
This is not a bug, exactly. The documentation in the manual and the documentation
in the code differ about what STRING-REVERSE-SEARCH-SET and STRING-REVERSE-SEARCH-NOT-SET
are supposed to do. What they do now is convenient for functions like STRING-TRIM,
but is not consistent with what you would expect based on the other searching functions.
Any suggestions for what to do? (Declare the manual to be wrong or change the functions
and the several places that call them.)
I would prefer that they would follow the explanation in the manual, ie the
example above would return 0, just because that is what the name of the
function suggests. At any rate, as it stands now the form
(string-reverse-search-char #/a "abc")
returns 0. String-reverse-search-char and string-reverse-search-set should at
least be consistent.