[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Issue: TAGBODY-CONTENTS (Version 3)

>  Is anybody concerned about macros that expand to a tagbody with NIL forms?
> If NIL is a statement in a tagbody then they disappear quietly,
> especially after a pass by a good compiler.
> With the current proposal, though, one will get:
>   "ERROR: Multiple appearances of tag NIL."
> I don't know what current practice is, if code like this has 
> always signalled an error then this is a total non-issue.
> If not, it might be noted as a possible conversion cost.

The Explorer permits using NIL as a GO tag, but as a special case, does
not warn about multiple appearances of NIL.