[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: RWK at MIT-MC, GLS at MIT-MC
- Subject: PSETQ
- From: JONL at MIT-MC (Jon L White)
- Date: Mon, 23 Mar 81 21:21:00 GMT
- Cc: (BUG LISP) at MIT-MC, (BUG LISPM) at MIT-MC
- Original-date: 23 MAR 1981 1621-EST
Date: 20 March 1981 22:58-EST
From: Robert W. Kerns <RWK at MIT-MC>
. . .
Both LISPM and MacLisp return the first argument. Since this is parallel
assignment, I'm less bothered by this than I might be, although I still
think it's less than optimal from a consistancy viewpoint.
MacLISP's action isn't an independent viewpoint -- I originally implemented
PSETQ as a macro which returned the last value, a la SETQ, and then
someone pointed out the discrepancy between that and the LISPM. Not
wanting to make waves (against stone walls?), I just quietly changed it
one day. However, I fear that there are now numerous places where the
value of PSETQ is being used.