Joe Bogner <joebog...@gmail.com> writes:

Hi Joe,

> I've used fun? to determine if an argument had the proper form of
> something that was executable or if it was data. It may not work in
> all cases, but it was sufficient for my use case.  As Alex mentioned,
> it won't let you know whether it's actually executable or not. I think
> of it as having the potential to be executable.

'fun? would be another possibility, but 'pair is a little bit more
tolerant (returns non-NIL in more cases), and since I apply it on Emacs
Lisp (and not PicoLisp) expressions, this tolerance seems to be a good
thing.

But thanks for the tip anyway!

> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 4:50 AM, Thorsten Jolitz
> <tjol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>     dexen deVries
>     <dexen.devr...@gmail.com> writes:
>     
>     
>     > On Monday 01 of July 2013 07:39:49 you wrote:
>     >> Hi Thorsten,
>     >>
>     >> > I wonder if there is a way in PicoLisp to check if some function
>     >> > argument is a SEXP, i.e. if something like a function 'sexp? exists
>     that
>     >> > returns T if the argument is a SEXP.
>     >
>     >
>     > how about (pair 'any) ? basically the opposite of (atom 'any)
>     
>     
>     thats probably what I was looking for, thanks, besides the fact that
>     Alex is of course right about the difficulties with doing these kind of
>     tests in a dynamic environment.
>     
>     
>     
>     --
>     cheers,
>     Thorsten
>     
>     --
>     UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
>     
>
>

-- 
cheers,
Thorsten

-- 
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

Reply via email to