>Hello everybody,
>
>I have traced down a problem in a big part of code to the following
>strange behaviour of sort:

...

>USER(6): ll
>("b" "c" "d" "f")
>
>Certainly this might be encompassed by always doing an explicit setf after
>sorting. But with this strange effect I would like to know whether the
>return value of sort is guaranteed to be correct.


The above results are correct. This is the way things
work. Think a little about it (draw a cons cell diagram).
Yes, you need the SETF.


Rainer Joswig


Rainer Joswig, Lavielle EDV Systemberatung GmbH & Co, Lotharstrasse 2b, D22041
Hamburg, Tel: +49 40 658088, Fax: +49 40 65808-202,
Email: <lavielle.com at joswig> , WWW: http://www.lavielle.com/~joswig/