[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue: FUNCTION-COERCE-TIME (Version 1)
- To: masinter.pa@Xerox.COM
- Subject: Re: Issue: FUNCTION-COERCE-TIME (Version 1)
- From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jun 88 10:37 EDT
- Cc: KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, CL-Cleanup@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
- In-reply-to: <880622-225811-3055@Xerox>
Date: 22 Jun 88 22:46 PDT
This is the right idea, but "at late as possible" is probably too vague to
Sigh. You're probably right.
I think the idea is that supplying x as a functional argument to remove-if,
mapc, etc. should work identically to supplying #'(lambda (&rest arguments)
(apply (if (functionp x) x (symbol-function x)) arguments))
Since I plan to submit a cleanup item to re-allow LAMBDA expressions as coerceable
to functions, i would appreciate it if we could avoid any wording that got us
caught up in irrelevant presuppositions about what was a function or what wasn't.
#'(lambda (&rest arguments) (apply (coerce x 'function) arguments))
would both make your local intent clearer and make this proposal more modular.
I'll take care of ammending it in a few days after I make sure there are no other