[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: "David A. Moon" <Moon@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
- Subject: &whole
- From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>
- Date: Wed, 05 Sep 1984 14:05:00 -0000
- Cc: Common-Lisp@SU-AI.ARPA, masinter.pa@XEROX.ARPA
- In-reply-to: Msg of 4 Sep 1984 16:12-EDT from David A. Moon <Moon at SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
- Sender: FAHLMAN@CMU-CS-C.ARPA
I'm ready to give up and go with total orthogonality for &whole. So
(defmacro foo (&whole x) ...) would complain if there are any
"arguments", and you have to put in an &rest if you want that complaint
to go away.
I think destructuring bind would be a good thing to have in the language
in any event. Maybe DBIND would be an adequate name? To avoid
confusion, the arglist syntax would have to be exactly as in defmacro.
Earlier proposals for DLET and DSETQ were tabled because there was
substantial disagreement on the syntax for these, but a form that
parallels arglist parsing in a defmacro would be conceptually clear and
trivial to implement (given existing code for defmacro).
- From: "David A. Moon" <Moon@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>