You mean PCL the CLOS implementation, right? -Peter
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Pascal Costanza <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 3 Dec 2010, at 13:34, Martin Simmons wrote: > >> I think it is confusing to use (values) for that purpose, because "no values" >> is also a valid return value (e.g. for reader macro functions >> http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/02_add.htm). >> >> I would make it a macro, called something like void. >> >> OTOH, use of (values) or (void) will prevent tail call optimization, so may >> be >> undesirable. > > I think this is the strongest argument in this thread: Most other arguments > seem to point out only subjective and/or stylistic issues, while this one is > a hard technical difference. Preventing tail call optimizations for stylistic > issues is a bad idea, IMHO. > > I have occasionally used the (values) idiom, but only in test situations, > when I don't like seeing return values in the REPL. I seem to recall some > uses of (values) in PCL. > > Pascal > > -- > Pascal Costanza, mailto:[email protected], http://p-cos.net > Vrije Universiteit Brussel > Software Languages Lab > Pleinlaan 2, B-1050 Brussel, Belgium > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > pro mailing list > [email protected] > http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro > -- Peter Seibel http://www.codequarterly.com/ _______________________________________________ pro mailing list [email protected] http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
