Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!convex!linac!att!ucbvax!priam.Berkeley.EDU!edward
From: edward@priam.Berkeley.EDU (Edward Wang)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: structures
Message-ID: <41872@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 24 Apr 91 20:54:26 GMT
References: <4535@skye.ed.ac.uk> <JMC.91Apr23063454@DEC-Lite.Stanford.EDU> <DAVIS.91Apr24144328@barbes.ilog.fr>
Sender: nobody@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 18

>
In article <JMC.91Apr23063454@DEC-Lite.Stanford.EDU> jmc@DEC-Lite.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:
>
>   The fact that using slot names as functional arguments requires
>   special hacks in Lisp is a consequence of the Lisp definers
>   of objects blindly following the mistakes of Pascal, etc.
>   CAR and CDR are slot names essentially, and from the very
>   beginning they were treated as function names.

I don't think this is quite true.  Adding the structure name
to the slot names to make slot function names is a feature.
It allows short slot names and longer, unambiguous slot function names.
In any case, Common Lisp lets you overide this:

	(defstruct (piffle (:conc-name ||))
	  ...)

So what's the problem?