[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue: FUNCTION-DEFINITION (Version 1)
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Issue: FUNCTION-DEFINITION (Version 1)
- From: gls@Think.COM
- Date: Tue, 8 Nov 88 15:00:20 EST
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, KMP@stony-brook.scrc.symbolics.com, CL-Cleanup@sail.stanford.edu
- In-reply-to: email@example.com's message of 8 Nov 88 11:26 PST <881108-112622-1084@Xerox>
Date: 8 Nov 88 11:26 PST
I also don't like SOURCE-CODE. I unfortunately don't like
FUNCTION-DEFINITION very much, either, but more for the reason that I'm
used to thinking of the "definition" of a function as the entire DEFUN
form, rather than the lambda expression that might be recovered from it.
I'm unsure how far we're willing to proscribe how much the form of the
original definition is retained. For example, after
(DEFUN FOO (X) X)
what is (FUNCTION-DEFINITION 'FOO)? Can it be
(BLOCK-LAMBDA FOO (X) X)
or must it be
(LAMBDA (X) (BLOCK FOO X))
or something else?
For example, can it be the same as the value of #'identity ?