[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Backquote proposal per issue 99
- To: Guy.Steele at CMU-10A
- Subject: Backquote proposal per issue 99
- From: MOON at SCRC-TENEX
- Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1982 02:10:00 -0000
- Cc: common-lisp at SU-AI
You just can't win. This time you got the backquotes in but the underscores
went away. Anyway, it looks like there isn't anything wrong with the specification;
I vote yes.
It was damned sneaky of you to use only numbers in your one nested-backquote
example, so that the reader would have no chance of figuring out when nor how
many times things wil be evaluated. You should at least put in the example
from page 214 of the Chine Nual, since this issue confuses everyone.