Re: request for a new function, say, `sequence'

[Luc Teirlinck]

Ken'ichi HANDA wrote:

   > I think calling the new function `sequence' or `range' is a
   > mistake. Lisp already has the functions `string' and `vector'
   > which are data type constructors. Either of the suggested names
   > sound like a new data type (in fact there is already a data type
   > called sequence and a predicate sequencep) and so inconsistent
   > with the current naming conventions.

   I see your point.

   > So I suggest that a more descriptive name be chosen -- for
   > instance something like `make-sequence-of-numbers'.

   I don't insist on having TYPE argument, always returning a
   list is ok.  So, for instance, make-number-list, is also
   acceptable.

While I agree that `sequence' would be confusing, I personally do not
believe that `range' would be.  If it is, then I would prefer
something like `range-list' or something else with range in the name.
We are not talking about an arbitrary sequence or list of numbers, but
about a consecutive range.

Sincerely,

Luc.