[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 88 12:17:20 PDT
From: James Rice <Rice@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Is there a good reason why this was omitted from CL?
It wasn't. It is caled LABELS. It only supports function binding (like
FLET), but that is the only case where the distinction between LETREC
and LET* is useful.
I beg to differ. I appreciate that I can declare recursive
local functions with Labels. I cannot, however refine recusive/
circular data structures with it. There seems to me to be a
good symetry argument in favour of non-function LetRec to
match with Labels. There also seems to be an argument in favour
of it in that those wanting to progam in a pure functional
style will not be able to declare circular structures in CL.
I don't think you can create circular structures with Scheme's LETREC,
either. The reason is that you would actually have to evaluate the
variable while creating the structure, and the values of the variables
being bound are undefined until all the initializations have completed.
In the case of procedures this is OK, because you don't actually
evaluate the procedure values until you invoke the procedure; all that
is needed in order to create the procedure is that the environment be
created with a placeholder for the procedure. So,
(letrec ((factorial (lambda (x)
(if (< 2 x) 1
(* x (factorial (- x 1)))))))
(letrec ((circular (list* 1 2 3 4 circular)))
is undefined, because the value of CIRCULAR is undefined at the time the
LIST* form is being evaluated.
In order to create circular structure, you have to do something like
(let ((circular (list 1 2 3 4)))
(setf (cdr (last circular)) circular)
I don't know how to do this kind of thing in a purely functional style.
- Re: LetRec?
- From: James Rice <Rice@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU>