[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Sandra J Loosemore <@cs.utah.edu:sandra@defun>
- Subject: Re: COMPILER-LET
- From: Jeff Dalton <jeff%aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK>
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 88 19:02:17 BST
- Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
> (defmacro with-scoped-agent (agent &body body)
> (labels ((with-scoped-agent-aux (scoped-agents body)
> `(macrolet ((val (thing pname)
> (val-aux thing pname ',scoped-agents))
> (with-scoped-agent (new-agent &body body)
> (cons new-agent ',scoped-agents)
> (with-scoped-agent-aux (list agent) body))
Um, maybe it's just me, but is this use of LABELS supposed to work?
When I try it here (KCL, Lucid), calls to the local macro die because
the local "-aux" function isn't defined.
> > In point of fact, an EVAL function for CL must keep around an
> > environment object -- else how can it know which variables are lexical
> > and know which operators are really lexical macros? Why not just put
> > the COMPILER-LETed special variables in the environemnt object--marked
> > as such--then PROGV or PROGW them exactly around EVAL's macro expansion
> > activity. How could this possibly be a large change to current
> > implementations?
I would like a description in terms of scope and extent.