[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: humble proposal: New special form progn-1

From: Tino Calancha
Subject: RE: humble proposal: New special form progn-1
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 20:35:30 +0900 (JST)
User-agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016, Drew Adams wrote:

and sometimes for a return-value computation that is followed by
some side effect such as showing a message.

But for most cases where someone else might use `prog1' I'm already
let-binding a variable that I use for the value that might otherwise
be returned by the `prog1' (or by a `prog2').

(let (... result) ... (setq result ...) ... result)

Yeah, i also like binding one 'result' variable: this way
all defun's in the code sistematically return
the last evaluated form.  Its easier to read.

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016, Clément Pit--Claudel wrote:
No, that's not what I meant. I meant that in Lisp when I want to write
(n - 1) I actually write (- n 1); thus, when I see progn-1,
I don't read it as "prog (n minus 1)", but instead as "progn dash 1".
Given the convention that foo-1 usually means
"internal function used in the implementation of foo",
I read it as "internal function used to implement progn".

This is another point against my proposal: the notation could be misleading.

So, i give up with my proposal.
Thank you very much.


reply via email to

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