Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!bcsaic!larryb
From: larryb@bcsaic.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: Against the Tide of Common LISP
Message-ID: <360@bcsaic.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 16-Feb-87 15:02:08 EST
Article-I.D.: bcsaic.360
Posted: Mon Feb 16 15:02:08 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Feb-87 03:46:28 EST
References: <2581@well.UUCP> <2582@well.UUCP>
Reply-To: larryb@bcsaic.UUCP (Larry Baum)
Organization: Boeing Computer Services AI Center, Seattle
Lines: 30

In article <2582@well.UUCP> jjacobs@well.UUCP (Jeffrey Jacobs) writes:
>a function, it is not *lexically* apparent whether an argument is
>SPECIAL or local, i.e. if I enter
>
>(DEFUN CONFUSE_ME (X Y Z)...
>
>Now, you tell me if the variables are going to be dynamic or lexical?
>Was a DEFVAR or a PROCLAIM issued earlier?  No way to tell, is
>there?

It is precisely for that reason that ALL special vartiables should be
so noted by the use of surrounding asterisks, such as *terminal-io*.
This does not, admittedly, rebut your complaint.  However, as in most
cases, maintainability is still a programmers responsibility.  If I
nhave to maintain your code, I will be upset if you do not stick with
this convention.

>You know perfectly well that interpreting macros takes more time!
>First you have to EVAL the form, and then give the result to EVAL
>again!  (And I *don't* consider it kosher to destructively expand
>without the user's control).
>
What is your alternative?  Don't use macros if you don't like them.  How
else could they be implemented that would not cause an extra step at
eval time?

LSB
-- 

* The opinions expresses are not necessarily those of my employer *