Itty bitty feature request for zl


    Sep 19 2008 | 6:12 pm
    yes, I'm trying to use 3 fewer objects....
    it would be just divine if [zl sect] sent a bang out of its right outlet when there was nothing in common between the two lists. If there is some other obvious object that does this, just tell me and I will sheepishly use it....
    M

    • Sep 19 2008 | 6:43 pm
      On 19 sept. 08, at 20:12, mattyo wrote:
      > yes, I'm trying to use 3 fewer objects.... > > it would be just divine if [zl sect] sent a bang out of its right > outlet when there was nothing in common between the two lists. If > there is some other obvious object that does this, just tell me and > I will sheepishly use it....
      You could use [zl sort] + [zl compare], but there will be a problem when you have the same value in the list appearing more than once. Request registered.
      ej
    • Sep 19 2008 | 6:57 pm
      On Sep 19, 2008, at 11:12 AM, mattyo wrote:
      > yes, I'm trying to use 3 fewer objects....
      I don't know the context of this request, but you could cobble something together using onebang. Of course, it's several more objects, not fewer.
    • Sep 19 2008 | 10:07 pm
      there are several ways to cobble it together -- I was just thinking of avoiding cobbling. It actually seemed so obvious to me that I started building the patch before I even bothered checking...
      Thanks for thinking about it, ej!
      M
      On Sep 19, 2008, at 14:57, Chris Muir wrote:
      > > On Sep 19, 2008, at 11:12 AM, mattyo wrote: > >> yes, I'm trying to use 3 fewer objects.... > > > I don't know the context of this request, but you could cobble > something together using onebang. Of course, it's several more > objects, not fewer. > > > > > > > >