[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue: RETURN-VALUES-UNSPECIFIED (Version 4)
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Issue: RETURN-VALUES-UNSPECIFIED (Version 4)
- From: Barry Margolin <barmar@Think.COM>
- Date: Sat, 8 Oct 88 14:47 EDT
- Cc: email@example.com, Masinter.firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <881007-211606-1727@Xerox>
Date: 7 Oct 88 21:16 PDT
Clarify that the return values for the listed constructs are as follows:
CLOSE -- the stream argument.
IN-PACKAGE -- the new package, i.e. the value of *PACKAGE* after the
execution of IN-PACKAGE.
RENAME-PACKAGE -- the renamed package.
SET-SYNTAX-FROM-CHAR -- T
LOCALLY -- the return values of the last form of its body, i.e. the body is
surrounded by an implicit PROGN.
Cost to Implementors:
This clarification will assist users in writing portable code.
Except for LOCALLY, I don't see the point of specifying the return
values of the above functions. Yes, the cost to implementors is small,
but why bother in the first place? I think they should be made
explicitly implementation defined, like the other functions that were
If others do prefer to specify explicit return values, I agree with the
particular choices (although for SET-SYNTAX-FROM-CHAR I don't see why it
shouldn't return one of the characters).