[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue: PROCLAIM-LEXICAL (Version 7)
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Issue: PROCLAIM-LEXICAL (Version 7)
- From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Mon, 26 Sep 88 18:21 EDT
- Cc: KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM, CL-Cleanup@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, JAR@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
- In-reply-to: <8809262150.AA00173@blacksox>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 88 14:50:10 pdt
From: Eric Benson <email@example.com>
... Do you want to make LEXICAL the default for otherwise unspecified
references? It still might be a good idea to warn about the absence
of any declaration.
This proposal doesn't suggest it.
I thought hard about it and decided there was really no reason to.
After all, you still need to initialize the variable you'll be
closing over, so you can do the proclamation at the same time.
The missing component which does need to be followed up on if this
gets approved is how we declare these variables. People will want
lexical analogs of DEFVAR and DEFPARAMETER or perhaps some extended
syntax to these which allows you to designate that the proclamation
should be LEXICAL instead of DYNAMIC. I suspect that this issue will
be a subject of much controversy as well, so I wanted to make sure it
was fully separated in order to stave off the multiplicative effects
of doing too many controversial things at once.