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


Here are a few questions that I would like to have answers back
on *** no later than Wednesday evening, November 10 ***.

(1) On the question of function-specs (for things like
like being able to DEFUN a function directly onto a property):
Shall we adopt:
	(a) LISP Machine's style of function specs
		Example:  (DEFUN (:PROPERTY FOO BAR) ...)
	(b) SETF-style function specs
		Example:  (DEFUN (GET 'FOO 'BAR) ...)
	(c) No function specs

(2) This is a repetition of issue 11 on the October ballot.
On issue 10 we agreed that global variables shall by convention
have names that begin and end with an asterisk (for example,
*prinlevel*).  Issue 11 was the same question for constants,
and the results were less conclusive, with myself, Moon, Wholey,
and Dyer being the prime opposition to using asterisks.

There is a question as to whether the asterisks are meant to
mean "this is global" or "this is bindable".  Fahlman points
out that when referring to a global object he doesn't want to have
to remember whether it is bindable or not.  My main objection
to surrounding names of constants with asterisks is that T and NIL
would obviously have to be exceptions to the rule, and secondarily
that I prefer to make the distinction between variables and
constants in a visual manner.

Anyway, I'd like to get further feedback on this.