[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: info-dylan@cambridge.apple.com*Subject*: Re: setter problem*From*: Jeff Dalton <jeff@aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk>*Date*: Mon, 26 Oct 92 21:41:47 GMT

> This doesn't work because setter isn't a function. The definition > of set-foo uses a variable > > (setter m) > > Of course, there is no such variable. Your program acts as if setter > is a function which takes one function and returns another, which is > not the case. Setter is syntax. But it is a function of exactly that sort in T (and EuLisp), which may explain why someone might expect it to be a function. And, for what it's worth, I prefer the T approach. Common Lisp needs somethign more general and macro-like, rather than a function->function function, for only a few cases such as LDB. -- jeff

- Prev by Date:
**Re: setter problem** - Next by Date:
**Re: setter problem** - Previous by thread:
**Re: setter problem** - Next by thread:
**Re: setter problem** - Index(es):