LispForum

Posted: **Fri Jul 24, 2015 5:44 am**

Hi guys,
I'm currently implementing my own lisp interpreter. At the moment I working on the function nconc. I'm not sure how it should behave for the following cases:

Code: Select all

(nconc 1)

or

Code: Select all

(nconc nil 1)

The gnu common lisp compiler returns 1 for both cases. Shouldn't the return value be a list. Isn't throwing an exception the better behaviour? Or is this behaviour forced by the standard?

regards,
Martin KalbfuÃŸ

Posted: **Sat Jul 25, 2015 2:31 am**

By the description section in CLHS you apply 2nd and 3rd rules.

[2] (nconc nil . lists) == (nconc . lists)
[3] (nconc list) => list

For your first code you apply the 3rd rule and

The last list may be any object.

That's:

Code: Select all

(nconc 1) => 1

For your second code you apply the 2nd rule then the 3rd one:

Code: Select all

(nconc nil 1) == (nconc 1) ;;; is equal to (nconc nil . (1)) == (nconc . (1))
(nconc 1) => 1

Posted: **Sat Jul 25, 2015 10:21 am**

While Goheecha's explanation is correct, an easier-to-understand explanation is that NCONC is the destructive version of APPEND, which is defined as:

CLHS APPEND wrote:... The last argument is not copied; it becomes the CDR of the final dotted pair of the concatenation of the preceding lists, or is returned directly if there are no preceding non-empty lists.

- edgar

LispForum

correct behaviour of nconc

correct behaviour of nconc

Re: correct behaviour of nconc

Re: correct behaviour of nconc