[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: common-lisp at SU-AI
- From: Richard M. Stallman <RMS at MIT-AI>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1982 08:24:00 -0000
I agree with Fahlman about binding constructs.
I want LAMBDA to be the way it is, and LET to be the way it is,
and certainly not the same.
As for multiple values, if LET is fully extended to do what
SETF can do, then (LET (((VALUES A B C) m-v-returning-form)) ...)
can be used to replace M-V-BIND, just as (SETF (VALUES A B C) ...)
can replace MULTIPLE-VALUES. I never use MULTIPLE-VALUES any more
because I think that the SETF style is clearer.