Raymond Toy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>>>> "Adam" == Adam Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Adam> Thanks again. It put me on the track of an arguably more elegant > Adam> solution: why not use the symbol's property list! > > The feeling I get from having read c.l.l for a while is that the > preferred way is to use hash-tables instead of attaching things to the > symbol's property list. > > Also, having worked on maxima a bit which does attach properies to > symbols, I must say I really dislike that. There's no one place to go > to find out the magic properties. I have to look at every single > symbol to find out if it's magic. :-( And a lot of the properties > are attached via hairy macros, so it's a pain to find those too.
While I generally agree with this sentiment (which is why my suggested solution did use a hash-table), in this case, where we are annotating the symbol with the defining form of its fdefinition, I can also see the point of using the symbol's property list. I'd draw the line along the question whether something is an annotation on a symbol which is to be considered part of the "developer environment", or whether it is just wanting to associate some value with a symbol used as a key to access it. In the later case I'd definitely recommend against property lists, but in the former, property lists can be beneficial, if used judiciously. Regs, Pierre. -- Pierre R. Mai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.pmsf.de/pmai/ The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, most experts agree, is by accident. That's where we come in; we're computer professionals. We cause accidents. -- Nathaniel Borenstein
