I was not aware that [list store] [insert( [delete( was a newer functions when I made this abs and I need to use it on a Raspberry Pi with custom OS with Pd 0.51.4 installed. Of course it would be better to upgrade Pd but I am not sure it is convenient. I am looking into it.

Any ideas on how I could rewrite this to work with Pd <0.52? I guess I could use prepend instead of insert, but how could I replace delete? If possible.

@cfry Just use [text], one item per line, gives you all the needed fuctions.

Edit: if you really want to do it with list objects than you can use [list split] to do delete.

@cfry I went ahead and made a pre-52 list store abstraction with set, insert and delete. Think they all work same as 52+ and should be a drop in replacement for pre52 [list store]. I skipped error handling so if you do something wrong it will give unhelpful errors, but you can add that.
list-store51.pd

Edit, Added the 0.52 get methods and fixed some errors. Still no error handling.

@cfry In Pd extended was a rough equivalent named [slist] which also had "save and recall from text file".
I had forgotten about it until I saw @oid's post (so much water under the bridge).
The keyword for "get" was "find".
I made [slist-master] during the big vanilla/extended fight a few years ago pre 0.52.
Might be correct and useful..... no guarantees... although I used it as a replacement for years before [list store] arrived.
It uses [list-drip].... so not as efficient as [list store]..... but will therefore give you more than one item per line.
It also uses [value] to distribute data across patches within an instance of Pd.... as did the original [slist].
slist.zip
(There are a couple of other list /value ideas cluttering up the zip).
David.

@oid awesome, tried but [list-store51] does not accept [get n -1( either. cool if you could update [list-store51] it to work.

@cfry Updated it in the previous post, and fixed a fairly significant error, forgot list indexes start counting at 0.

@oid works fine once I initated it with [set 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0(. Seems like [insert( will aso init a list even if none is declared/set. Sweet, thanks!

@cfry Yeah, it is less picky about the use of set and insert, which is where the error handling would be helpful but I did not bother since it should be safe as long as you do you patching with [list-store] in 52 and then change the object to [list-store51] before sending it to your pi, which can be done with a script easily enough. Probably best not to get in the habit of exploiting the areas where [list-store51] differs from [list store], will just bite you down the road when you finally get 52 or newer on the pi, will either be stuck with the considerably less efficient abstraction or have to rework stuff.

I updated it again, you reminded me that I forgot initial list as arguments.