Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!topaz!husc6!seismo!umcp-cs!chris
From: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: net.emacs
Subject: Re: MLisp in Gosling's
Message-ID: <2713@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 2-Aug-86 18:53:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.2713
Posted: Sat Aug  2 18:53:25 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 3-Aug-86 06:07:09 EDT
References: <1514@vax135.UUCP> <916@unirot.UUCP> <371@nbs-amrf.UUCP>
Reply-To: chris@maryland.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Organization: University of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Sci.
Lines: 17

In article <371@nbs-amrf.UUCP> manheime@nbs-amrf.UUCP (Ken Manheimer) writes:
>The binding scheme is important.  [The one in MLisp] can be
>very insidious and have enourmous impact on applications.
>You lose recursion ... to the Mlisp binding bug.

Actually, it *is* possible to write recursive routines.  You have
to use a two-stage argument evaluation method:

	(defun foo $foo-arg1
	    (setq $foo-arg1 (arg 1))
	    (progn $foo-local-var
		(setq $foo-local-var $foo-arg1)
		...))
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 1516)
UUCP:	seismo!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet:	chris@umcp-cs		ARPA:	chris@mimsy.umd.edu