[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: On uninterned symbols
From: |
Michael Livshin |
Subject: |
Re: On uninterned symbols |
Date: |
17 May 2001 11:05:46 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Copyleft) |
Martin Grabmueller <address@hidden> writes:
> guile> (define g (gensym))
> guile> g
> #~g0
> guile> (eq? g '#~g0)
> #t
> guile> (define s (gensym "foo bar"))
> guile> s
> #~#{foo\ bar0}#
> guile> (eq? s '#~#{foo bar0}#)
> #t
::blink::
in what way are they uninterned, then? it seems to me that the reader
still canonicalizes them in some way (else `eq?' wouldn't return #t).
so basically your uninterned symbols just have very funny names.
[ sorry if I'm talking nonsense, I'm not really awake yet. ]
--
You can sing to my cat if you like.
Re: On uninterned symbols, Marius Vollmer, 2001/05/24