[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
DEFVAR
- To: Kent M Pitman <KMP@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
- Subject: DEFVAR
- From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1986 17:45:00 -0000
- Cc: Common-Lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- In-reply-to: Msg of 16 Oct 1986 00:28-EDT from Kent M Pitman <KMP at STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
CLtL (p68) is not explicit on its intent about whether (DEFVAR FOO) is
allowed to or intended to intialize FOO.
I believe that everyone's intent was that (DEFVAR FOO) should leave FOO
unbound. I would have sworn that the manual said this, but I guess it
doesn't.
Given that and the current syntax, there is the question of how the user
is supposed to supply a doc string for the variable if no initial
value is wanted. This was discussed in the past on one or two
occasions. I think the general feeling was that SETF of DOCUMENTAITON
was good enough in the rare case where this functionality is needed.
-- Scott
- Follow-Ups:
- DEFVAR
- From: David C. Plummer <DCP@QUABBIN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>