Related to #72. After some discussion in that PR, it seemed as though the consensus was to make cycle accept the length of the resulting list (as opposed to e.g. the number of times the given list should be cycled). This PR contains what I believe to be a relatively fast TCO implementation of cycle with the desired behavior (since this would be the initial implementation, there isn't really anything to benchmark it against).
Related to #72. After some discussion in that PR, it seemed as though the consensus was to make
cycle
accept the length of the resulting list (as opposed to e.g. the number of times the given list should be cycled). This PR contains what I believe to be a relatively fast TCO implementation ofcycle
with the desired behavior (since this would be the initial implementation, there isn't really anything to benchmark it against).