Re: [PATCH] Add-native-hashtable-helper-functions

[Ludovic Courtès]

Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> skribis:

> address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> Nala Ginrut <address@hidden> skribis:
>>
>>> +(define (hash-keys table)
>>> +  "Return all the keys from hash table."
>>> +  (hash-map->list (lambda (x y) x) table))
>>
>> That doesn’t seem sufficiently common to warrant a new procedure.  WDYT?
>
> FWIW, I think it would be reasonable to add 'hash-keys'.  Many users
> are accustomed to writing in a style that's made more convenient by
> 'hash-keys', and in cases where efficiency is not crucial, I think
> it's a fine style.  Also, sometimes the values aren't needed.
>
> IMO, we can afford to add a few conveniences such as this.

Yes, I agree with this statement.  It turns out that I don’t see
how/when one would use ‘hash-keys?’.  Any examples?

No strong feeling about this one anyway, so if you think it makes sense,
that’s fine with me.

Ludo’.