[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: initforms and implicit blocks
- To: NGALL@BBNG.ARPA
- Subject: Re: initforms and implicit blocks
- From: "Glenn S. Burke" <GSB@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 13 Mar 86 02:17:42 EST
- Cc: COMMON-LISP@SU-AI.ARPA, apollo!dfm@UW-BEAVER.ARPA
A little semantic experiment i did in NIL (i don't know if it is in
the released version) is that
(defun foo (params...) ...)
defines foo to havve a function definition of
(named-lambda foo (params...) ...).
THis is similar but not identical to the named-lambda which had been
on the lispm at some point. Additionally, when applied, that function
is that provides the named block. All the forms for &optional and &key
arguments in the lambda list are evaluated inside of the block.
With the right modularity, this was not at all difficult to put into
both the compiler and the interpreter.