[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Proposal #9: Variable Name Conflicts
- To: Andy Freeman <FREEMAN@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
- Subject: Proposal #9: Variable Name Conflicts
- From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1986 21:18:00 -0000
- Cc: common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- In-reply-to: Msg of 30 Jul 1986 16:51-EDT from Andy Freeman <FREEMAN at SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
- Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Lambda and defun are not sequential binding forms; the order of
argument evaluation is irrelevant. "Lambda and defun are sequential
binding forms because the arguments they are applied to are evaluated
sequentially" is the only interpretation of Fahlman's statement I
could think of. I'm certain he had something else in mind; that's
much like Masinter's position which neither Fahlman nor I agree with.
Well, DEFUN and LAMBDA are partly sequential-binding forms. They
process defaults and &aux vars sequentially. That's what I was
referring to.
-- Scott