Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!jarthur!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!forsight!gat
From: gat@robotics.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Erann Gat)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: FUNCALL question
Message-ID: <387@forsight.Jpl.Nasa.Gov>
Date: 2 Feb 90 01:04:13 GMT
References: <3277@accuvax.nwu.edu> <1990Jan28.175437.19293@hellgate.utah.edu> <1666@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Lines: 15

In article <1666@skye.ed.ac.uk>, jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton) writes:
> No, you have it wrong -- this time. 

I stand corrected, and I apologize for my careless use of the terms
symbol-value and symbol-function.  Nevertheless, I stand by the 
assertion that identifiers in Common Lisp, be they local or global,
have two bindings, a value binding and a function binding, and that
this is the reason for the existence of an explicit FUNCALL function,
that is, to enable one to call a function stored in an identifier's
value slot.

I also reaffirm my position that multiple bindings cause a great deal of
confusion!

-Erann