On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 14:34, Nicholas Clark wrote: > > I'm not sure how worthwhile this really is, but I think it means that > there's no argument about what's the most efficient way to reverse sort > a list - don't write a reversed comparison function, simply write > reverse sort .... > > Nicholas Clark I wonder if this could be turned into yet another context -- "reverse list" context -- causing any returning array to get reversed on the stack before being returned, in a lighter way than calling the reverse function. Just another idea.Thread Previous | Thread Next