[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: setter problem
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org, Jeff Dalton <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: setter problem
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Andrew LM Shalit)
- Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 16:48:02 -0500
At 9:41 PM 10/26/92 +0000, Jeff Dalton wrote:
> > 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
Both the Common Lisp and T approaches have the problem that you cannot
export a getter without also exporting the setter. Dylan does not
have this problem.