[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?
From: |
Michael Livshin |
Subject: |
Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"? |
Date: |
25 Apr 2001 18:50:40 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Copyleft) |
Rob Browning <address@hidden> writes:
> ISTR that common-lisp solved this by having gensym return names from a
> reserved namspace that were supposed to globally unique...
it's even simpler: CL gensym generates unreadable symbols, so there's
simply no way you can use such a symbol in a program.
I'd rather we figured a way to make the hygienic macro stuff fast
enough...
> So I guess that perhaps trying to use syntax-case might be better,
> though I'm less familiar with it :<
common problem, it seems. but it does implement the regular
`syntax-rules' thingy from R5RS.
--
:FATAL ERROR -- ILLEGAL ERROR-
- Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/24
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Martin Grabmueller, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Martin Grabmueller, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Michael Livshin, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Dale P. Smith, 2001/04/25
- Re: Is gentemp or gensym "safe"?, Rob Browning, 2001/04/25