[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
SETF of pathname components
- To: RWK@SCRC-YUKON.ARPA
- Subject: SETF of pathname components
- From: Glenn S. Burke <GSB@MIT-MC.ARPA>
- Date: Tue, 15 Oct 85 18:23:24 EDT
- Cc: common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 85 15:25 EDT
From: Robert W. Kerns <RWK@SCRC-YUKON.ARPA>
. . .
For uniformity we could extend this to other read-only accessors
like SYMBOL-NAME, and DENOMINATOR although it's hard to see it as
useful in the former case, and it's pretty strange in the later
(and probably indicative of a woefully ineffecient program).
I agree with Moon's analysis, but i disagree that on these grounds
SETF should handle pathname components like LDB handles integers. I
don't think pathnames appear to be sufficiently non-structured that
the read-only-ness of the components should be taken advantage of
in order to permit this hack.
The same goes for symbol-name. As for denominator, it sounds
sufficiently ludicrous that i think it also should be left out, but
only because it seems perverse.