[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: (BUG LISP) at MIT-MC, NIL at MIT-MC
- Subject: CASEQ
- From: JONL at MIT-MC (Jon L White)
- Date: Thu, 10 Aug 78 10:22:00 GMT
- Original-date: 10 AUG 1978 0622-EDT
RLB has suggested a good resolution of the ambiguity inherent in the
"force-acceptance" clause for CASEQ: instead of the symbol T, let it be
the nullist. True in maclisp, the nullist is also a symbol, but in NIL
the nullist will be outside the range of any of the forms on which to
dispatch (SYMBOLs, FIXNUMs, FLONUMs, CHAROBs). Who will be
adversely affected by this change? Can we put out a feeler in the
AI/LCS community for the change to be effective in MACLISP also?
As for MACLISP, if the "forcer" does conflict by being a symbol, it
can be made unambiguous in the "search" context by listifying it.