[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
SYSP
- To: EB at MIT-MC
- Subject: SYSP
- From: Kent M. Pitman <KMP at MIT-MC>
- Date: Thu, 5 Feb 81 21:41:00 GMT
- Cc: BUG-LISP at MIT-MC
- Original-date: 5 February 1981 16:41-EST
The manual is misleading. They were assuming you redefine a SUBR by clobbering
its SUBR property. Personally, I think system symbols should return T even if
they are redefined. Eg, my fortran->lisp translator wants to know if it should
rename a fortran name if it conflicts with a lisp name ... It doesn't care if
it (the translator) has redefined the name in the current environ, it just
wants to protect the code it generates.