Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!sun-barr!olivea!mintaka!mintaka.lcs.mit.edu!alan
From: alan@lcs.mit.edu (Alan Bawden)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Subject: Re: Named constants in Scheme
Message-ID: <ALAN.91May22122857@august.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: 22 May 91 19:28:57 GMT
References: <chip.674143084@soi> <1991May15.172635.18635@Think.COM>
	<chip.674492719@soi> <1991May18.203022.9325@snitor.uucp>
	<JINX.91May21191708@chamarti.ai.mit.edu>
	<JAFFER.91May21223843@aarau.ai.mit.edu>
Sender: news@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu
Organization: ITS Preservation Society
Lines: 10
In-Reply-To: jaffer@zurich.ai.mit.edu's message of 22 May 91 02:38:43 GMT

In article <JAFFER.91May21223843@aarau.ai.mit.edu>
jaffer@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Aubrey Jaffer) writes:

   But when macros are finalized we WILL have 2 different classes of
   variables.  Lets use the same environment for constants as for macros.

Good grief, I certainly hope not.  I thought one of things we all agreed
upon was that names for variables and names for syntax belonged in the same
namespace.  But perhaps I misunderstand what you mean by "classes of
variables".