[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(MULTIPLE-VALUE (NIL ...) ...)
- To: Common-Lisp @ SU-AI
- Subject: (MULTIPLE-VALUE (NIL ...) ...)
- From: Kent M. Pitman <KMP @ MIT-MC>
- Date: Wed, 01 Jun 1983 20:53:00 -0000
By the way, I have carefully watched my code over the last year and in easily
three quarters of the cases where I wanted to ignore arguments, it was because
I in fact only wanted one value back. In Moon's example, I agree that
(LET (TEM) (MULTIPLE-VALUE (NIL TEM) ...) ...)
is not as nice as
(MULTIPLE-VALUE-BIND (NIL TEM) ... ...)
but I would prefer
(LET ((TEM (NTH-VALUE 2 ...))) ...)
On the other hand, I think the point of Benson's note was to point out that
the compiler should be able to handle
(MULTIPLE-VALUE-BIND (IGNORE TEM) ... ...)
if IGNORE isn't used, without needing to make something special about NIL.
I am sympathetic to such an argument.
In any case, in addition to (not in place of) anything that is decided along
these lines, what would people think about adding NTH-VALUE to the list of
available primitives? From my experience, it's frequently just the right thing.