[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

PROG1 as a function

To: Michael Greenwald <Greenwald@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: PROG1 as a function
From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 89 14:29 EST
Cc: barmar@Think.COM, common-lisp@sail.stanford.edu
In-reply-to: <19890104191710.7.GREENWALD@NOEL-COWARD.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>

    Date: Wed, 4 Jan 89 14:17 EST
    From: Michael Greenwald <Greenwald@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>

	Date: Wed, 4 Jan 89 13:49 EST
	From: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>

	CLtL is vague about the order of evaluation of function arguments.

    Actually, CLtL pg 61 says that the arguments and parameters are
    processed in order, from left to right.  I don't know if "processed"
    implies "evaluated", but I always assumed (perhaps incorrectly) it did.

"Arguments" are the output from evaluation, not the input to evaluation.
Think about the case where the function was called by APPLY.

References:
- PROG1 as a function
  - From: Michael Greenwald <Greenwald@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>

Prev by Date: PROG1 as a function
Next by Date: PROG1 as a function; meta-rules of CLtL
Previous by thread: PROG1 as a function
Next by thread: PROG1 as a function
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread