[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: t and nil in pure memory?

From: Chong Yidong
Subject: Re: t and nil in pure memory?
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:47:18 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux)

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

>     As maintainer I care about maintainability of the code.  I will reject
>     such a change.
> 2 lines whose meaning is totally obvious -- not much work to maintain.
> This looks like stubbornness to me.  I have no reason to be stubborn
> about it, so I will move on.

(I sent an earlier email about this, but it seems to have gotten lost.)

FWIW, in CLISP and CMUCL (unintern nil) and (unintern t) are no-ops
returning nil.  Presumably the other CL implementations do likewise.

It seems to me that it'd do no harm to do likewise, but since others
care strongly about this and I don't, I'll just shrug and go along...

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]