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


re: Insofar as GLOBAL is very like LEXICAL, it would count for "current
    practice", would it not? The reason for GLOBAL is primarily for performance
    -- it is a deep-bound implementation, and references to GLOBAL variables
    are significantly faster.  I don't think Medley users would get along OK
    without it.  I don't think users of *any* deep-bound implementation would

Quite right.  You can also add to current practice that QLISP uses a
GLOBAL declaration in just about the same way that Interlisp-D/Medley
does.  [It was probably my comment in the Discussion that you referred to 
when you said "It would be possible to submit a proposal for a GLOBAL (G)
declaration under separate cover if anyone (Xerox?) was interested."]

I think QLISP would find acceptable the minor adjustment about allowing 
purely local lexical rebinding of proclaimed GLOBAL's.  Surely Medley
would have no trouble accommodating either.

-- JonL --

P.S.  QLISP is a research prototype of Lucid Common Lisp running on a
      certain parallel processor.  It uses deep-binding for the obvious
      reason.  By the bye, "research prototype" doesn't mean "it's a dog";
      there is some serious research being conducted using QLISP as a tool.