Also, there is this baddie:
On 16 Jan 2013, at 00:18, David Sargeant wrote:
(function () { var collect66 = []; for (var num = 10; num <= 1; num += 1) { collect66['push'](num);
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
}; return collect66;})();
Not at all a major issue, but collect66.push would fit rather better in this context. There are a couple more instances of this kind in the code of ParenScript, they all boil down to keywords being used with @ instead of literal symbols:
src/lib/ps-dom.lisp:6: `(@ ,el :inner-h-t-m-l)) src/lib/ps-dom.lisp:12: `((@ ,el :get-attribute) ,attr)) src/lib/ps-loop.lisp:102: (then (if (numberp by) ` ((@ ,var :slice) ,by) `(,by ,var)))) src/lib/ps-loop.lisp:167: (:collect `((@ ,var :push) ,item)) src/macros.lisp:177: (if (eql ,funobj (@ __PS_MV_REG :tag)) src/macros.lisp:178: (@ __PS_MV_REG :values) src/non-cl.lisp:189: `((@ (list ,@things) :join) "")))
Do you think we should fix them, or is this totally insignificant?
— B. Smilga.