[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: KMP at MIT-MC
- From: JONL at MIT-MC (Jon L White)
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 81 21:55:00 GMT
- Cc: (BUG LISP) at MIT-MC
- Original-date: 17 FEB 1981 1655-EST
Date: 17 February 1981 16:11-EST
From: Kent M. Pitman <kmp at MIT-MC>
From the lisp 1.5 programmer's manual
(defun listp (x)
(or (null x) (and (not (atom x)) (listp (cdr x))))
The idea of making hunks not answer T to the atom test
is a new one and one that was allowed in only for USRHUNKs because
many implementors (myself included) use HUNK as an extended cons . . .
THIS IS COMPLETELY FALSE. The idea that hunks weren't "atoms" came
at the very first, partly as a push from Stavros Macrakis. USRHUNKs
came only last year. You've still ignored the documentation of
Thursday June 07,1979 FQ+5D.11H.58M.56S. - Jonl -
1) Value of "MAKHUNK" permits use of a new HUNK2 space.
Which makes it impossible to use hunks in general as lists without
resetting the default values of certain switches.
Furthermore, you've ignored the fact that no documentation
explicitly promised hunks-as-lists for more than a handful of functions.
GET isn't one of them. Any usage of these undocumented actions must be
categorized a MacLISP-only kludges, and the perpretator of them can't
expect continuing compatibility.