[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- Subject: compiler-let
- From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1986 15:14:00 -0000
- Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
In reply to: Niels Lauritzen <SR.LAURITZEN at SPEECH.MIT.EDU>
Now I propose another form to round out the "binding" family
MACROEXPAND-FLET. Use it to define functions that are only used
during the dynamic extent of macroexpansion.
MACROEXPAND-LET* would be icing on the cake because the same effect
could be achieved by using a series of nested MACROEXPAND-LETs.
macroexpand time binding of a macro (dynamic scoping),
COMPILER-LET (or MACROEXPAND-LET, if you prefer) is of very marginal
benefit, if any. If people feel that such a thing must be fully rounded
out for reasons of symmetry, I say we should flush the whole thing.
I also feel that it was a major mistake letting MACROLET in, but I've
already lost that battle twice and don't plan to fight it again.