[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
DECLARE-MACROS (Version 1)
- To: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Subject: DECLARE-MACROS (Version 1)
- From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Mon, 9 Nov 87 14:22 EST
- Cc: CL-Cleanup@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
- In-reply-to: <871109135845.4.KMP@RIO-DE-JANEIRO.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 87 13:58 EST
From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 87 13:53 EST
From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
This looks ready to release, with two minor wording corrections:
Make it illegal for a macro call to expand into a DECLARE form and be
recognized as such.
Strictly speaking there is no such thing as a DECLARE form, since a list
whose car is the symbol DECLARE is an error to evaluate. CLtL p.153
uses the term "declaration" for this, although I admit it also says
"declare form" in one place. Anyway I'd feel more comfortable if we
said "declaration" here.
How about "declare expression"? I had deliberately avoided the term
"declaration" because I wasn't clear if a "proclaim form" was a
declaration. Perhaps we should explicitly acknowledge that we don't intend
to keep macros from expanding into declare forms to avoid later confusion
on the issue.
I don't understand why anyone would think a proclaim form was a declaration.
I can see how they might think the object passed as an argument to PROCLAIM
should be called a declaration. "Declare expression" would be okay, although
I don't see why we can't use the terminology CLtL uses instead of making up
Your last sentence must be a typo, the whole point is to keep macros
from expanding into declare forms. Maybe "declare" should be "proclaim"?
Explicitly saying that sounds good (it already does, doesn't it?).