[no subject]

[JONL at MIT-MC (Jon L White)]

From:     GSB@MIT-ML
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 81 20:30:12 GMT
Original-Date: 02/17/81 16:30:12 EDT
Subject: Re: get & hunks
    To: jonl at MIT-MC, kmp at MIT-MC
    Jonl, i have yet to see anything in the examples of "documentation"
    you supplied which would indicate to me that GET (and putprop and
    remprop) should not treat hunks like disembodied property lists.
    .  .  .
No one ever claimed that GET was debarred from treating hunks as
lists -- I merely showed you **ALL** the documentation on hunks,
and the "list contract" was guranteed only for CAR, CDR, EQUAL,
SUBST, PURCOPY, PRINT and a couple other explicitly mentined ones.
In fact, one cannot win in general using hunks as lists unless
he overrides the default settings of the switches HUNKP and MAKHUNK.