[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Questions from M. Hagiya
- To: DLW @ SCRC-QUABBIN
- Subject: Questions from M. Hagiya
- From: Earl A. Killian <EAK @ MIT-MC>
- Date: Sat, 01 Sep 1984 23:03:00 -0000
- Cc: common-lisp @ SU-AI
- In-reply-to: Msg of Sun 26 Aug 84 21:11 EDT from Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW at SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 84 21:11 EDT
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW at SCRC-QUABBIN.ARPA>
If we evaluate (setf (symbol-function 'moshi) (symbol-function 'if)),
does Common Lisp specify that this "works", i.e. that the symbol "moshi"
(a Japanese word for "if") can now be used as the name-symbol of a
special form, just as well as "if"? (I told him I thought the answer
was "no", but it's not stated clearly in the manual.)
I would tend to agree withj your "no"; on the other hand I feel
strongly that there ought to be a *PORTABLE* way to do renaming.
Obviously having MOSHI be a synonym for IF can easily be done by
macros; the more interesting case is when you want to make MOSHI
mean IF and IF then mean something else. Unfortunately most
compilers seem to build the known function names right into the
compiler source (e.g. (EQ F '+)) rather than using a database
that can be rearranged (e.g. by using symbol property lists).
If something isn't done about this, then it is going to be
difficult to experiment with future language design using Common
Lisp implementations as a starting point.