# List operations (Was: More LPMOO stuff)

Seth I. Rich (sir@po.cwru.edu)
Wed, 16 Aug 1995 13:15:07 PDT

- Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

    > One thing I would like to see, in regular MOO (and so it's a suggestion for
    > LPMOO as well) are the range constructions:
    >
    >                 [..n] and [n..]
    >
    > Hence list[n..] would be equivalent to list[n..length(list)], except it
    > should save the extra time of evaluating length(list).

    Apparently nobody bothered looking at the upcoming features list.  This
    is already on the slate for inclusion, with '$' being used to refer to
    the length of the referenced list.

    Why would you want syntax which -looks- like a typo?

    Seth / Blackbriar

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Seth I. Rich
    Woo, woo!  OpalMOO's back!       There is nothing more precious than
    Rabbits on walls, no problem.    a tear of true repentance.