Le mardi 13 mars 2007 à 21:53 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis a écrit : 
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Gregory Vanuxem wrote:
> 
> | > I see your question as suggesting that we should have the translator
> | > honor the Lisp convention -- that would be the most logical thing to
> | > do.  If people agree, I can add that capability to the translator --
> | > and of course, I'll document it :-)
> |
> | :-)
> |
> | Not exactly, I'm not suggesting something though rereading my mail it
> | seems to be. In fact I asked some thoughts because I don't know how this
> | should be handled. I like the idea to add support of Lisp special
> | variables (*something*) but on the other hand this is a restriction. You
> | have to use $variable or *variable*. Don't know what to do, force the
> | user or use a more general way via a declaration.
> 
> OK; I believe it is an issue we have to address.  Would you prefer
> 
>     _*PACKAGE_* : global           -- Boot, please, *PACKAGE* is global
>     callingPackage := _*PACKAGE_*
>     -- ... do some work ...
>     _*PACKAGE_* := callingPackage
> 
> instead?

Yes, why not, that could be a good idea I think.

Greg




_______________________________________________
Axiom-developer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer

Reply via email to