[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: issue DEFINING-MACROS-NON-TOP-LEVEL (Version 4)
- To: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Subject: Re: issue DEFINING-MACROS-NON-TOP-LEVEL (Version 4)
- From: David N Gray <Gray@DSG.csc.ti.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Sep 88 10:35:44 CDT
- Cc: sandra%defun@cs.utah.edu, CL-Compiler@SAIL.Stanford.edu
- In-reply-to: Msg of Sun, 25 Sep 88 16:58 EDT from Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Sender: GRAY@Kelvin.csc.ti.com
> * For the most part, it doesn't make any sense to do
> (DEFUN ... (DEFUN ...)) so it seems strange to encourage it.
I don't think it was the purpose of this proposal to encourage this. It
is made possible as a side effect of permitting more interesting things
such as (LET (...) (DEFUN ...)). The Explorer supports non-top-level
DEFUNs but issues a style warning on a DEFUN within a DEFUN saying that
"either there is a right parenthesis missing or you should be using FLET
instead." In other words, legal, but not encouraged.