Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!njin!princeton!phoenix!eliot
From: eliot@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Eliot Handelman)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Scope of EVAL (was: Re: Summing a list)
Message-ID: <4154@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 28 Oct 88 00:57:14 GMT
References: <10794@srcsip.UUCP> <10813@srcsip.UUCP> <249@pitstop.UUCP>
Reply-To: eliot@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Eliot Handelman)
Organization: Princeton University, NJ
Lines: 19

In article <249@pitstop.UUCP> robv@pitstop.UUCP (Rob Vollum) writes:

>Of course, there are the other problems, such as EVAL not being
>able to "see" lexical variables, etc.

Is that really true?  In the following example, EVAL consults the lexical
environment, rather that the global.

(setq x nil)

And now (let* ((x t) (y x)) (eval y)) => t

The result of the first evalution sets y to x; yet EVAL gets the effective
lexical binding anyway. This also seems to work whether or not the code is
compiled and x is made special.  Can you give an example where that
isn't the case?

Eliot Handelman
Music, Princeton U.