[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [David A. Moon: Issue: HASH-TABLE-PACKAGE-GENERATORS (version 5)]
- To: Cris Perdue <cperdue@Sun.COM>
- Subject: Re: [David A. Moon: Issue: HASH-TABLE-PACKAGE-GENERATORS (version 5)]
- From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Mon, 5 Dec 88 20:51 EST
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <8812060142.AA03217@clam.sun.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 88 17:42:39 PST
From: cperdue@Sun.COM (Cris Perdue)
Jeff Peck has forwarded me a copy of this proposal. (I had seen an
earlier versions.) I have one comment at this point:
Why not define <next-fn> as a local function as if defined by
FLET rather than a macro as if defined by MACROLET? It seems
to me that a local function is more useful
I wanted to allow it to be a local function, but JonL convinced
me that a macro gave more scope to the implememtation to optimize
without losing anything essential in these circumstances. I think
JonL was right.
, and that it is not
possible to prevent the user from defining a local function,
so no problems are avoided.
I don't understand this part of your comment.