MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <905C5ED0-6639-4DEB-95AC-A2FCB2C4491D@gmail.com>
            <AANLkTinSd4KS9gbk_cBPseFjbTFfSmSJUgYJUUP_vpBZ@mail.gmail.com>
            <E8A13BAD-6790-4966-9BAF-379E21DD249C@gmail.com>
            <AANLkTin1PWjtDuxug+ZjGKKg=VBbuz7Pf12rCkAo9+ex@mail.gmail.com>
            <AANLkTinh=zgNFCYWuGwO4mCsL6a7Yezxec264DmWwabk@mail.gmail.com>
            <935A1EA2-C971-4A3A-8DF4-6F890E0CFB32@gmail.com>
            <5256FD2C-CD53-4FF0-A405-5B8B2781E5EC@gmail.com>
            <AANLkTinfC5YVmG57GhGsFAddi1jy7PiZ+6cjV1Wx7KCD@mail.gmail.com>
            <A30A1074-CC53-495E-864C-91180793D8FB@gmail.com>
            <AANLkTi=KxLLEnwJsUzXe9rujQqnFX+rEFWRQq3o=v1_N@mail.gmail.com>
            <19843.17637.935263.780194@morse.mittelbach-online.de>
            <4D835315.3040004@residenset.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Message-ID:  <AANLkTik+k-OKm=HJB2F07b5gjEuAdtmku+uT4Mvi01rS@mail.gmail.com>
Date:         Fri, 18 Mar 2011 09:46:23 -0400
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>
From: Bruno Le Floch <blflatex@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: expl3's seq_pop_right etc.
To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de
In-Reply-To:  <4D835315.3040004@residenset.net>
Precedence: list
Status: R

Sorry Lars,

I got your surname completely wrong in my previous email. (not sure
why that happened)


>> a constructed function name ie "c" though that is something you would
>> seldom need I guess.
>
> And it would be covered by applying a suitable \exp_args:... to the
> ..._map_function:... call, would it not?

The simplest would be
\cs_set_eq:NN \..._map_function:NN \..._map_function:Nn
\cs_generate_variant:Nn \..._map_function:NN {Nc}


>    ...map_function:Nn \l_foo_seq { \func:nn{foo} }
>
> rather do
>
>    \cs_new:Npn \map_func:n #1 { \func:nn{foo}{#1} }
>
>    ...map_function:NN \l_foo_seq \map_func:n
>
> ? The downside of this is that it hardwires the "foo" into a function
> body, when in practice it might be data that changes from call to call.
> You can of course redefine \map_func:n before every use, but it feels
> unelegant.

In the current implementation, if expandability is not an issue,
prefer map_inline, as it does not require any test for termination.

\seq_map_inline:Nn \l_foo_seq { \func:nn {foo} {#1} }

But if you need expandability, then map_function is required.

>    \cs_new:Npn \exch_args:Nnnn #1 #2 #3 #4 { #1{#2}{#4}{#3} }

I'd personally call it \use_i_bii_biv_biii:nnnn, where "b" means
"braced". This is more extensible, and fits with the current
\use_i_ii:nnn.

> but \exch_args:Nnnn is more elegant, since it can be reused in more places.

Regards,
-- Bruno