[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: more on BOGUS-FIXNUMS
- To: Jeff Dalton <jeff%aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk>
- Subject: Re: more on BOGUS-FIXNUMS
- From: sandra%cdr@cs.utah.edu (Sandra J Loosemore)
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 88 10:56:40 MDT
- Cc: cl-cleanup@sail.stanford.edu
- In-reply-to: Jeff Dalton <jeff%aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>, Fri, 22 Jul 88 17:04:31 BST
I think this is probably just a misunderstanding of terminology --
what Stan Shebs described to me as being "fixnums" are clearly not the
same beasties that you call "fixnums".
I could play devil's advocate here and point out that the confusion
over terminology tends to support my argument for getting rid of the
name "fixnum" from the language entirely; when an implementation has
several different classes of numbers, which one(s) do you call
"fixnum"? In PSL and its derivatives, for example, the class of
numbers which are called "inums" (represented as immediate data) are
more "fixnum"ish than the class of numbers called "fixnums"!
-Sandra
-------