[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Common-Lisp at SU-AI
- From: MOON at SCRC-TENEX
- Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1982 04:36:00 -0000
- In-reply-to: The message of Sunday, 8 August 1982 19:54-EDT from Fahlman at Cmu-20c
I guess some recipient of this list had better to take responsibility
to forward my message to whatever the hell "slisp: at CMU-20C" is.
I have a couple things to say about Scott's message, aside from Symbolics'
own comments which should get mailed to GLS today or tomorrow.
Page 130: Has anyone got a reasonable algorithm coded up for
rationalize? If not, this function must be flushed from the white
RATIONAL and the main part of RATIONALIZE have existed in the Lisp machine
for a long time. I wouldn't know whether MIT considers these its property.
The algorithm seems reasonable although its implementation could be made
Page 132: As noted before, the tolerance arguments to MOD and REM must
One of my comments is that I was mistaken in suggesting these; the operation
should be a separate function.
Page 213: We need a kind of stream that really passes the commands and
data to a user-supplied function of closure and another kind where the
user-supplied function gets the commands and supplies the data.
Probably the right way to do this is to pass the command (OUCH,
FLUSH-OUTPUT, or whatever) as the first arg to the function and the
evaluated args to that command as the &rest arg. This is sort of flavor
like, but as long as we don't get into inheritance and mixing I have
objection to this. That would give us enough rope to do all sorts of
weird I/O things.
This is totally incomprehensible. Could we have a clarification?