[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Is &body REALLY like &rest?
- To: Common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- Subject: Is &body REALLY like &rest?
- From: Pavel.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: Wed, 28 May 1986 20:08:00 -0000
Another in a long series of clarifications of clarifications is
In CLtL, page 145, it says
``&body This is identical in function to &rest...''
In Guy's clarifications, it says
``145 Extend the syntax of an &body parameter to DEFMACRO to allow
&body (body-var [declarations-var [doc-var]])''
so as to make it easy to call PARSE-BODY.
In CLtL, page 146, it says
``Anywhere in the lambda-list where a parameter name may appear and
where ordinary lambda-list syntax ... does not otherwise allow a list,
a lambda-list may appear in place of the parameter name.''
This allows for destructuring.
Question: Does the following DEFMACRO do destructuring or does it call
(defmacro foo (&rest (a b c)) (bar a b c))
The real question is whether or not the clarification introduced a
difference in the meanings of &rest and &body. One possible
interpretation is that a list after &rest does destructuring and a list
after &body implies a call to PARSE-BODY.
Which one is right?