[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: JONL at MIT-MC, (BUG LISP) at MIT-MC, NIL at MIT-MC
- Subject: CASEQ
- From: MOON at MIT-MC (David A. Moon)
- Date: Thu, 10 Aug 78 20:33:00 GMT
- Original-date: 10 AUG 1978 1633-EDT
Are you saying that you aren't allowed to have null (what we used to
call NIL) be one of the cases you can select for with CASEQ? Come on
now, JONL, that is obviously unreasonable.
As far as I can see, the migration from OTHERWISE to T to ()
is picking more and more commonly-used objects as the distinguished
thing which you have to put in parentheses if you want it, with
less and less mnemonic names, which makes CASEQ less and less useful.
This is not the direction you should be going!