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


TYPE-SPECIFIER-P is an appropriate name for a function that takes an
(OR SYMBOL LIST) and tells whether it's a valid specifier.  If you're
going to replace this with a function that takes a SYMBOL and tells
whether it's the name of a type, call it TYPE-NAME-P.

However, I agree with Masinter's comment that we should concentrate on
fixing what is wrong with the language rather than adding more features.
I have no objection to either of TYPE-SPECIFIER-P or TYPE-NAME-P if
someone can show why these are needed to fix something wrong with the
language.  Perhaps Guy can comment on why the original proposal 51 in
his clarifications list was tagged with an asterisk indicating that it
corrects an important flaw or resolves an ambiguity in the