[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: AS%HP-HULK@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
- Subject: Re: keywords
- From: Bernard S. Greenberg <BSG@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
- Date: Wed, 4 Dec 85 13:28 EST
- Cc: common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- In-reply-to: The message of 4 Dec 85 11:42-EST from Alan Snyder <AS@HP-HULK>
Date: Wed 4 Dec 85 08:42:23-PST
From: Alan Snyder <AS@HP-HULK>
Symbolics Common Lisp relies heavily on the property lists of keywords.
Given that a keyword is "an indicator that means X in context Y",
it is right reasonable that context Y might want to hang properties off
of it to implement that.
An alternative is to use the keyword as the indicator on a property
list attached to Y, which avoids the potential conflicts in using
a global database (a propertly list attached to a keyword).
When propertly implemented [sorry], you use packages to isolate these
things. The issue is no different than with any other symbol.
It is inevitable that keywords will be interpreted differently
in different contexts. What you want to avoid is conflicts
that would prevent the different contexts from coexisting.
That's why you use property lists.