That is interesting. At a minimum it solves the else part of the cond. I would never have thought of using struct->vector on things I knew weren't structs.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 7:43 AM, Robby Findler <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:robby@eecs.northwestern.edu">robby@eecs.northwestern.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div></div><div class="h5">On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Dave Herman <<a href="mailto:dherman@ccs.neu.edu">dherman@ccs.neu.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
>> This probably doesn't help Doug, but here is another way to define the<br>
>> function linked above:<br>
><br>
> That's neat, thanks! Has struct->vector always worked on non-structs?<br>
<br>
</div></div>I'm not sure about always, but at some point a while ago, Matthew<br>
decided that all values are structs (in the sense that you could have<br>
implemented everything with structs and scope, etc even if some of<br>
them are implemented in C) and adapted the primitives to make them<br>
behave accordingly.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Robby<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>