[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[PARCVAX.XEROX.COM, not PARC-VAX] and Re: symbol-function of non-functions
- To: common-lisp@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
- Subject: [PARCVAX.XEROX.COM, not PARC-VAX] and Re: symbol-function of non-functions
- From: Masinter.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1987 18:42:00 -0000
- In-reply-to: David C. Plummer <DCP@QUABBIN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>'s message of Fri, 23 Jan 87 09:21 EST
[For those attempting to FTP the lisp course survey, the host name is
PARCVAX.XEROX.COM, not PARC-VAX.XEROX.COM.]
There was a misconception in David Plummer's reply that I think should
be cleared up. The explaination given was one where the
"symbol-function" implicit in obtaining the functional interpretation of
car-of-form was repeated until the result was not a symbol. I.e., Dave
(defun bottom () "The end!")
(setf (symbol-function 'test) 'bottom)
would return "The end!"
(This was the basis for the description that the reason why NIL fails as
a value for symbol-function is because NIL has no function definition.)
Nothing in CLtL requires this to be true. Many Common Lisp
implementations do not allow this form, although it is apparently
allowed in some.
Since apparently many people believe this is a property of Common Lisp,
it may be grounds for a "clarification".