Neil Conway wrote: > On 23-Mar-04, at 7:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > No, lcons is one of the names that I think we should stick with on > > historical grounds. It's widely used in the backend and it has the > > right connotations for anyone who's ever used Lisp. > > I think it has exactly the *wrong* connotations: the name suggests that > it creates a new cons cell (along with the ensuing implications about > performance and the internal implementation of the list), which is no > longer the case. > > How about lprepend()? That allows for some symmetric with lappend().
Wow, I like that one! -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
