[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
New Issue: SYNTACTIC-ENVIRONMENT-ACCESS
- To: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: New Issue: SYNTACTIC-ENVIRONMENT-ACCESS
- From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Mon, 3 Oct 88 22:56 EDT
- Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <881002155456.5.KMP@GRYPHON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
I agree with the general tenor of Kent's comments. I'd like to see
an alternate version of the proposal written up that way, so we can
see the ramifications.
I also wonder about having separate accessors for scope, type, and
(for functions) inlinitude. Would it be more or less elegant to
have a single accessor that returns all this information as multiple
values? I'd say more elegant, although I'm not sure what happens
if the type was proclaimed but the inlinitude was declared.