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

Re: Another bug (rotatef should return NIL)

>To: kcl@rascal.ics.utexas.edu
>Subject: Another bug (rotatef should return NIL)
>Date: Tue, 20 Oct 87 14:25:08 -0400
>From: quiroz@cs.rochester.edu
>Rotatef returns the old value of the first subform, against the
>specification in p. 99.
>Although using the guaranteed NIL return to effect conditional
>control would most likely be in bad taste, it would still be legal
>CL, so this change is incompatible with the standard.

You are right.  This is a bug.  I remember I have fixed this bug some
weeks ago.  This bug will be cleared in the next release.

-- Taiichi