[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- Subject: Re: compiler-let
- From: Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW@QUABBIN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jul 86 18:10 EDT
- In-reply-to: <8607071945.AA17899@utah-orion.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 86 13:45:37 MDT
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Stanley Shebs)
For PCLS we took advantage of subsetness and totally ignored COMPILER-LET,
since nobody could figure out what it was really for or how a user could
use it in correct code.
That's a very good way to make design decisions.
It's certainly true that CLtL does not explain compiler-let well enough.
A single example would probably help a great deal.
For purposes of future manual revisions: what other features did you
totally ignore for the same reasons?