[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Get of a Hunk
- To: JONL at MIT-MC
- Subject: Get of a Hunk
- From: KMP at MIT-MC (Kent M. Pitman)
- Date: Mon, 16 Feb 81 06:47:00 GMT
- Cc: (BUG LISP) at MIT-MC
- Original-date: 16 FEB 1981 0147-EST
GET has never been advertised to do anything except return () when
applied to something other than a LIST or a SYMBOL....
This is *not* true. GET has been advertised to work on symbols and
disembodied property lists, which are lists of a certain form.
Since HUNKs are advertised and have been for a long time to behave
like lists, you are changing a documented behavior. No longer will
simple rules tell us when HUNKs are lists and when they are not. We
will have to remember tables of how each function works on them. I
think this is very sad, for while I will agree that it is bad that
for HUNKs to have behaved originally as non-atoms, there is a wealth
of code that depends on this now and I don't want to see it broken.
Why don't you admit you made a quick-and-easy patch instead of a
correct one. There was a very straightforward albeit longer patch
that would have been right: Make GET of a USRHUNK return () if you
like -- or send the thing a GET message(?) -- and make GET on normal
hunks still cdr the thing like all good list-like frobs have been
defined to do.