Hi again,
Albert Krewinkel wrote:
(for e in-matrix foo with-indices (i j))
That sure is a good way to do this. Maybe you are right, and the python zen "explizit is better than implicit" applies to this situation as well. But I just feel like it's more verbose than necessary.
To me it seems like "Iterate zen". Otherwise you are with things like Series. Actually, naming things simplifies (or make possible) some complex loops.
(iter (for el in-vector v with-index i) (setf (aref v i) 1)) the expansion code will contain (setq el (aref...)).
The Iterate zen is for i index-of-vector. See manual. That would not invoke aref.
The careful reader of the manual might expect (for nil in-vector ... with-index i) to avoid aref given a clever implementation, however Iterate is not Loop, so that construct does not work (yet?) with Iterate.
BTW, do users consider this a bug? (iter (for nil in-vector "abc") (counting t)) => error (loop for nil across "abc" count t) => 3 (loop for nil in '(1 2 3) count t) => 3 etc.
However (iter (for nil in-package "CL" :external-only t) (counting t)) => 978 probably as a hazard of the implementation.
It's a quick hack and for testing only (ecase row-or-column ((or column col) ('row
Your code may appear to work for you, but your case expression is subtly broken. Please try (for el in-vector v by OR) (for el in-vector v by QUOTE)
Regards, Jorg Hohle.