Re: (n)reverse vs. length

[Stefan Monnier]

> Hm, what about an existing code which relies on aset'table strings?

I recommend against it.  And I've been known to install changes in trunk
to make such code use arrays instead (or avoid `aset', depending on the
situation).

> Questions like
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-04/msg00378.html
> shows that treating string as an array of characters is a common
> practice (which is "natural" for the people with C background).

I know.  And we should discourage that practice.

> And, in case of large strings, in-place reverse may save a lot
> of memory.

I can't think of any case where it can save a significant amount
of memory.


        Stefan