Re: Avoid using "listput()" if possible?

Bill Allombert on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 20:03:36 +0100

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Avoid using "listput()" if possible?

To: pari-users@pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr
Subject: Re: Avoid using "listput()" if possible?
From: Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux.fr>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 20:03:28 +0100
References: <828080f4d966c56549c5ed0cea3be1cb@stamm-wilbrandt.de> <ZfDdr80RrotZU1tS@seventeen> <CAJkPp5PpYA-UcM-U0gYYdPyVBm_uoTr9ut7Z09tbktGPKRmp+w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 01:58:02PM -0400, Max Alekseyev wrote:
> Hi Bill,
> 
> Why is this explicit specification for the object reference required for
> listput() ? 

Because it modifies its argument.

> What happens if ~ is missed?

Currently, nothing happen for backward compatibility reasons...

> It looks like functions that don't modify the object (like
> mapget()) implicitly work with references, with no need to specify ~.
> Please confirm.

Correct. mapget does not modify its arguments so is not concerned.
All functions works with references, however most of them do not
modify their arguments.

Cheers,
Bill

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Avoid using "listput()" if possible?
  - From: Max Alekseyev <maxale@gmail.com>

References:
- Avoid using "listput()" if possible?
  - From: hermann@stamm-wilbrandt.de
- Re: Avoid using "listput()" if possible?
  - From: Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux.fr>
- Re: Avoid using "listput()" if possible?
  - From: Max Alekseyev <maxale@gmail.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Finding coefficients in linear combination
Next by Date: Re: Avoid using "listput()" if possible?
Previous by thread: Re: Avoid using "listput()" if possible?
Next by thread: Re: Avoid using "listput()" if possible?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread