[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Applying functions to all the symbols in a package...
Back when the initial design was being done, we explicitly considered
whether to go with MAP-SYMBOLS or DO-SYMBOLS. At the time, it seemed
that most of us had the opposite religion from Mr. Miller. Most of us
favored the iterative form, and I don't remember anyone arguing for the
mapping form. A practical argument is that DO-SYMBOLS typically is used
in situations where there are a LOT of symbols must be processed, and in
the absence of a very clever compiler the MAP form would be slower due
to the need for explicitly calling the supplied functional argument.
I don't think that it would be worthwhile to include both forms just to
accommodate both stylistic preferences. These facilities are not used
often, so the occasional use of a less-favored style should not be a big
hardship for anyone. And, of course, fanatical DO-haters can write a
MAP-SYMBOLS macro easily enough, and not have to worry about what it