[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
setf order of evaluation
- To: Timothy Daly <DALY@ibm.com>
- Subject: setf order of evaluation
- From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Wed, 9 Sep 87 14:40 EDT
- Cc: email@example.com
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 9 September 1987, 10:31:51 EDT
From: Timothy Daly <DALY@ibm.com>
(setq r '(a 1 b 2 c 3))
(setq s r)
(setf (getf r 'b) (progn (setq r nil) 6))
what is the value of R and S?
Note that P97 of CLtL states that SETF guarantees the
left-to-right order of evaluation of its arguments.
(yes, i know it is crufty to change R).
Both Symbolics and Lucid seem to generate
R = (B 8) and S = (A 1 B 2 C 3)
which implies that the second argument of setf
is evaluated first. What did I miss?
It's not a good idea to speak of "arguments" when dealing with
forms that aren't function calls. It's less confusing to speak
of subforms. The subforms of that setf that get evaluated are
(progn (setq r nil) 6)
so I think the behavior you describe is a bug (although the description
in CLtL is so ambiguous that the implementors of the respective systems
could easily disagree with me.)
I didn't look inside the Lucid implementation, but in the Symbolics
implementation the source of the bug is that (get-setf-method 'r)
returns NIL, NIL, (#:G6411), (SETQ R #:G6411), R, whereas it should
return (#:G6410), (R), (#:G6411), (SETQ R #:G6411), #:G6410. See
CLtL page 104 for the description of the meaning of these values.
Changing it to return the latter makes your SETF example behave as you
expected, evaluating R -before- bashing it, and setq'ing it to the updated
property list -after- setq'ing it to nil.