If you want an example, click on the eye icon.
If you want more features, go to this topic.
You forgot to share…
There, you can interact with that project.
I’m a little confused about why you wrap the object in a data structure that has properties OBJECT and VALUE instead of, if you want the object to have a value, using
Instead of
you can use
which is faster and I think more readable.
I find the two RETURNs in the title text of
confusing. I would suggest
instead. (And, again, putting the value in the object itself instead of making this wrapper around it.)
Otherwise this is cool.
How is it faster? Converting to a linked list takes O(n) time complexity, no?
If you construct a list using 
it is “born linked.” And if you use it on a list that was previously in array form, the resulting list is hybrid, linked at the left end and arrayed at the right. It’s only using 
on an array that takes O(n) time.
Of course it depends on how you’re going to use the list later. If you’re going to jump around it with 
with arbitrary indices then you definitely want it in array form.
In this program, the list is a mere temporary for use with CALL. So I don’t think there’s any downside.
Ah really? I’ve been skipping out on IN FRONT OF before 
It returns both object and value. It’s the same as
(return object ($object :: #796f5b) and value [] :: #f2deb6)
I guess. I still don’t see why you build the ability to add fields to an object and then not use it for this value you want to associate with the object!