[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: DLA at MIT-EECS
- From: Carl W. Hoffman <CWH at MIT-MC>
- Date: Sat ,2 May 81 16:16:00 EDT
- Cc: dlw at MIT-AI, LISP-FORUM at MIT-AI, BUG-LISPM at MIT-AI
Date: 1 May 1981 1845-EDT
From: David L. Andre <DLA at MIT-EECS>
Actually, the more I think about it, a syntax such as
(OPENF "FOO" ':MODE ':READ ...) *would* be awful convenient
in a lot of places...
I would also like to see OPENF created rather than the syntax of OPEN
changed, for name symmetry with the rest of the file operations. Should
CLOSEF also be created? (Actually, I would rather see the names OPEN-FILE,
PROBE-FILE, DELETE-FILE, etc used.) Names like OPEN should be left for new
users writing small programs, so they won't get blown out of the water by
redefining a short and simple name which happens to be used by the system.
OPEN just isn't used as frequently as IF, DO, or SETQ to warrant a four or
five letter name.