[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue: WITH-OUTPUT-TO-STRING-APPEND-STYLE (Version 4)
- To: edsel!jonl@LaBrea.Stanford.EDU
- Subject: Issue: WITH-OUTPUT-TO-STRING-APPEND-STYLE (Version 4)
- From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Sat, 28 May 88 13:13 EDT
- Cc: Cl-Cleanup@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
- In-reply-to: <8805240502.AA04386@bhopal.lucid.com>
Date: Mon, 23 May 88 22:02:19 PDT
From: Jon L White <edsel!jonl@labrea.stanford.edu>
Subject: Issue: WITH-OUTPUT-TO-STRING-APPEND-STYLE (Version 4)
Proposal (WITH-OUTPUT-TO-STRING-APPEND-STYLE:VECTOR-PUSH-EXTEND):
Change the documentation of WITH-OUTPUT-TO-STRING to be like that under
FORMAT. That is, replace the first sentence of the next-to-last paragraph
on CLtL p331 by:
"If *string* is specified, it must be a string with a fill pointer;
the output is incrementally appended to the string (as if by use of
VECTOR-PUSH-EXTEND)."
...
Maybe I'm just confused, but aren't the fill-pointer and adjustable features
orthogonal? It's my belief that you can create a non-adjustable array with a
fill-pointer. Don't you want to say that it must be an adjustable array rather
than (or perhaps in addition to) that it must be a fill pointer?
Aside from this (real or perceived) confusion over the wording, I have no
objection to this proposal.