Barton Willis wrote:
>Given all this, I think we should do member --> memq (again).
Why? If you really think about it, then I guess we should
introduce macros like simp-flaggedp as Stavros suggested:
>(defmacro simp-flaggedp (x)
> `(let ((cdarx (cdar ,x)))
> (if cdarx
> (or (eq (car cdarx) 'simp)
> (member 'simp cdarx :test #'eq))
> ;;Function call rarely called, so use a shorter but
> ;; slower code sequence in this case rather than member
> ;; which gives an inline loop
> nil)))
But for heavens sakedon't reintroduce memq again.
What is it about memq that makes it so sacred?
There is that perfectly goo common lisp function member that does
everything that memq does and more.
Andreas