comp.lang.lisp Google Group

Re: Not the name of a function

2009-11-20T23:02:23Z

On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:32:03 +0100, p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J.
Yes.
Such sophisticated analysis tool(s) are 2/3 of a compiler anyway - all
that's missing is code generation. While tool making might provide a
few jobs in a poor economy, I don't think it is the best use of
resources. I think it makes more sense that compilers - which have to

Re: Not the name of a function

2009-11-20T22:32:03Z

But this is not a valid conformant form (even if clisp accepts it).
S/USER[1]> (defstruct balloon (color))
BALLOON
S/CL-USER[2]> (let ((b (make-balloon)))
((setf balloon-color) :blue b))
; in: LAMBDA NIL
; ((SETF BALLOON-COLOR) :BLUE B)
;
; caught ERROR:
; illegal function call

Re: Not the name of a function

2009-11-20T22:20:16Z

You have a point there. There is an ambiguity in the code, and the machine is
diagnosing it in a way which assumes that you are a Lisp expert.
Compound forms /can/ in fact be be function names. For instance
(defstruct balloon (color))
(let ((b (balloon)))
((setf balloon-color) :blue b))
So (setf balloon-color) is the compound name of a setter function.

Re: Symbol macros don't capture their lexical environments?

2009-11-20T21:35:08Z

This was discussed at length a few years back. A group search turns
up this thread:
[link]
which seems to have come from this conversation:
[link]

Re: Not the name of a function

2009-11-20T21:10:37Z

But that's what it was telling you, it's just a matter of rearranging
the word order a little bit:
In other words: "The form (NOT (CONTAINED-IN-PATTERN-VAR ITEM BINDINGS))
is not the name of a function".
Alberto

Re: Symbol macros don't capture their lexical environments?

2009-11-20T20:16:48Z

The issue
COMPILE-FILE-HANDLING-OF-TOP-L EVEL-FORMS
names VaxLisp in Current Practise as an example where that was the case,
and it also mentions controversy about the issue.
What I find most puzzling is that it additonally says that the
compilation environment inherits from the evaluation environment.

Re: what up w ads

2009-11-20T19:27:31Z

Those are truly ads? <tincap> I thought they are noise disguised as
advertisement (so that no human accidentally reads them and starts
wondering) containing steganograph'ed 'bot messages. Well, that's what
I think ;-) </tincap>

Re: Clozure and Clojure

2009-11-20T19:27:07Z

ccc31807 schrieb:
Try both.
After just a few days it will become very obvious for you which you
prefer.
André

(www.brandshoes08.com) Paypal wholesale brand shoes,clothes,handbag,watch,eyeglass,cap,BELT,shawl,wallet and so on.

2009-11-20T19:16:19Z

(paypal payment)([link] ) cheap wholesale,
puma,hat
(paypal payment)( [link] ) cheap
wholesale,bape ,hat
(paypal payment)( [link] ) cheap wholesale, era
NBA ,hat
(paypal payment)( [link] ) cheap
wholesale,era ,hat
(paypal payment)( [link] ) cheap wholesale, ED

Re: Clozure and Clojure

2009-11-20T18:13:41Z

Well, neither.
They are separate efforts, but presumably both trace their names to the
notion of "closures" in Lisp.
Clozure, I'm fairly certain came first. It just used a simple "s->z"
transformation. Clojure comes up with a similar pronounciation by using
a "j", which also serves to indicate its connection with Java.

Re: Predicate for lexical bindings

2009-11-20T18:47:54Z

In article <_5adnZNkq6ndRJvW4p2d...@telen or.com>,
No, that is not true. The symbol is created when "x" is *read*.
That's kind of like saying "1+1=2 whether or not 1 exists or not."
It's true that (symbolp 'x) will always return T, but it is not true (or
at least badly misleading) that this is "whether X already existed or

Re: Symbol macros don't capture their lexical environments?

2009-11-20T18:46:45Z

I tried to shed some light on another confusion that I didn't see other
people to address.
-T.

Re: Symbol macros don't capture their lexical environments?

2009-11-20T18:42:26Z

In article <87pr7dgjgf....@freebits.de>,
That's true, but it can be a side-effect of *trying* to make a point.
And your point would be...?
rg

Re: Predicate for lexical bindings

2009-11-20T18:13:34Z

Looking at your comments I think the way it is written needs improving. I
do think I basically understand it though.
If read up a couple of post's for instance you would see that I am aware
that it is the reader that creates symbols and that defvar creates a
binding to that symbol. The symbol in turn get's assigned a binding to

۞۞۞paypal wholesale cheap replica hangbags & purse at www.ecyaya.com

2009-11-20T18:12:33Z

۞__۞__۞paypal wholesale cheap replica hangbags & purse at [link]
replica bag replica prada bag replica new prada bag replica claasic
prada bag replica prada handbag replica shoulder bags replica Prada
Cervo Pleat Hobo Bag on [link]
Replica Prada Cervo Pleat Hobo Bag detail below:
The replica Prada Cervo Pleat hobo Bag is an ordinary deerskin

comp.lang.lisp Google Group

Re: Not the name of a function

Re: Not the name of a function

Re: Not the name of a function

Re: Symbol macros don't capture their lexical environments?

Re: Not the name of a function

Re: Symbol macros don't capture their lexical environments?

Re: what up w ads

Re: Clozure and Clojure

(www.brandshoes08.com) Paypal wholesale brand shoes,clothes,handbag,watch,eyeglass,cap,BELT,shawl,wallet and so on.

Re: Clozure and Clojure

Re: Predicate for lexical bindings

Re: Symbol macros don't capture their lexical environments?

Re: Symbol macros don't capture their lexical environments?

Re: Predicate for lexical bindings

۞__۞__۞paypal wholesale cheap replica hangbags & purse at www.ecyaya.com

۞۞۞paypal wholesale cheap replica hangbags & purse at www.ecyaya.com