[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(HUNK 'A) when MAKHUNK = NIL
- To: JONL at MIT-MC, GSB at MIT-MC
- Subject: (HUNK 'A) when MAKHUNK = NIL
- From: RWK at MIT-MC (Robert W. Kerns)
- Date: Sat, 9 Jun 79 07:04:00 GMT
- Cc: KMP at MIT-MC, RWK at MIT-MC, (BUG LISP) at MIT-MC
- Original-date: 9 JUN 1979 0304-EDT
Date: 7 June 1979 09:34-EDT
From: Jon L White <JONL at MIT-MC>
cc: KMP, RWK, BUG-LISP
Re: (HUNK 'A) when MAKHUNK = NIL
I vote for (NIL . A) rather than (A) or even (#777777 . A).
the reasoning is semi-backwards compatibility, that no #777777 frobs
appear in list structure (that is supposed to be an "illegal"
pointer!), and also consistency in what (CXR 0 (HUNK <froblet>))
As per our conversation last Tuesday, this is not at all compatible.
What is used to return is what is compatble: (A) ...
Just because it has consistancy doesn't NOT make it compatible! If
the MAKHUNK has no other purpose than compatibilty, DON'T BLOW IT BY
NOT PROVIDING TRUE COMPATIBLITY INSTEAD OF CONSISTANCY. If you're not
going to provide consistancy, don't even bother with the switch!