[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Iteration Status
From: shebs%utah-orion@utah-cs.ARPA (Stanley Shebs)
Subject: Iteration Status
Is this topic dead? I was going through an old MAIL.TXT and observed that
the last discussion of an iteration standard was over a year ago, and there
was very little consensus about the form or even a need for a general
Perhaps the topic is dead. That would be too bad. I think Common Lisp does
need something more than DO.
There are at least two portable iterator macros now,
a version of MIT LOOP done by Dave Miller at DePaul and a rendition of the
PSL FOR macro done by myself. Neither of them is really acceptable as a
standard, although they are fine yellow pages material.
We have a portable LOOP construct as well; it will be released shortly. The
construct is described in a memo that was distributed a while ago. I'm not
sure if this one is more suitable for a standard than the others. What about
the others makes them unsuitable?
Personally, I've drifted into using DO and sequence functions, and find them
more convenient than trying to drag a library-type FOR module everywhere I go.
Others at Utah seem to have a similar viewpoint.
I disagree. The sequence functions are OK, but DO is unreadable to me. Every
time I see one I have to decode it. I think we can do better.