On 23-Mar-04, at 7:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> No, lcons is one of the names that I think we should stick with on
> historical grounds. It's widely used in the backend and it has the
> right connotations for anyone who's ever used Lisp.
I think it has exactly the *wrong* connotations: the name suggests that
it creates a new cons cell (along with the ensuing implications about
performance and the internal implementation of the list), which is no
longer the case.
How about lprepend()? That allows for some symmetric with lappend().
-Neil