Andre van Tonder scripsit: > I don't think this ticket makes any sense. Neither x nor y should > be required to be evaluable. It clashes with modules. It confuses > levels.
It bypasses modules and levels by operating with objects rather than names for objects. I don't see that as necessarily a Bad Thing. > It may cause problems for systems that invoke a compiler on the > argument of EVAL. That is, a compiler that accepts textual input rather than data structures, CL:FILE-COMPILE rather than CL:COMPILE. This is why Andy's earlier post confused me. In any case, due to the volume and nature of the complaints, I have withdrawn this ticket. -- A: "Spiro conjectures Ex-Lax." John Cowan Q: "What does Pat Nixon frost her cakes with?" [email protected] --"Jeopardy" for generative semanticists http://www.ccil.org/~cowan _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
