[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: unintern a symbol vs set to nil
From: |
Pascal J. Bourguignon |
Subject: |
Re: unintern a symbol vs set to nil |
Date: |
Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:17:07 -0000 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) |
Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:
> Hi, Xah.
>
> Xah Lee <xahlee@gmail.com> wrote:
>> in a elisp program, if i have created a temp var (but not using let)
> ....
>
> As a matter of interest, how do you do that?
>
>> .... and later i want to delete the var, i can do:
>
>> (setq temp1 nil)
>
>> or is it better to do
>
>> (unintern 'temp1)
>
> Shouldn't much matter. Probably better to set it to nil, because that's
> more usual. OTOH, if you want to detect an error should temp1 be
> subsequently accessed, then uninterning it will be better.
Not at all. (Yet some other fodder for Xah's idiocy articles, sorry).
(defvar temp1 42)
(defun f ()
temp1)
(unintern 'temp1)
(f) --> 42
>> The temp1 var holds a big list, and there are few more, e.g. temp2,
>> temp3.
>
> Either approach will allow these lists to be garbage collected.
Wrong. See above.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: unintern a symbol vs set to nil,
Pascal J. Bourguignon <=