[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue: LISP-SYMBOL-REDEFINITION (Version 3)
- To: CL-Cleanup@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
- Subject: Issue: LISP-SYMBOL-REDEFINITION (Version 3)
- From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 88 18:30 EDT
My notes from Fairfax meeting...
Needs to be discussed concurrently with PACKAGE-CLUTTER since they
are pretty closely related.
Thought ready to vote.
Perdue: Concern about not being able to TRACE functions in LISP.
Masinter: It's already a dangerous thing to do.
KMP: Just noticed that proposal should say "undefined", -not- "unspecified".
Haflich: Proposal should say if it's ok for users to redefine symbols
that CLtL doesn't define. PACKAGE-CLUTTER suggests that the
system can't provide a LAMBDA definition, but this proposal
should say whether users can create such a definition.
Slater: Can you shadow CAR? [in the package sense]
Masinter: Of course.
JonL: The term "shadow" is used ambiguously. Don't talk about shadowing
using FLET because it leads to confusion.
No vote was attempted.