all right, thanks!
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 12:27 PM wrote:
> So, reading Alex’s comments and also the definition of the “joke” `setf`
> here:
>
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 10:29 -04:00, Mike wrote:
>
> https://github.com/picolisp/picolisp/blob/dev/misc/setf.l
>
>
> informs me that the answer to
So, reading Alex’s comments and also the definition of the “joke” `setf` here:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 10:29 -04:00, Mike wrote:
> https://github.com/picolisp/picolisp/blob/dev/misc/setf.l
informs me that the answer to Bruno’s question is: yes, the concept in fact
*does* exist in picolisp (by the
hope I'm forgiven if a flame war starts, but I'm trying to understand what
> makes a good lisp.
>
> So, why is there no setf in picolisp?
--
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
[setf (+ (** c 2) (+ (* -5 c) 6)) 0] ?!
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019, 07:39 Alexander Burger wrote:
> Hi Bruno,
>
> > So, why is there no setf in picolisp?
>
> The answer is simple: It does not make sense.
>
> PicoLisp is a pure interpreter, and what 'setf' does is setti
Hi Bruno,
> So, why is there no setf in picolisp?
The answer is simple: It does not make sense.
PicoLisp is a pure interpreter, and what 'setf' does is setting the value of
what the expression *would* return. I'm not fit in CommonLisp, but
(setf (car X) 7)
means to set the CAR of the c
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 05:11:45AM +, SuperSaiyanBlue wrote:
> What does setf do that set or setq can't do?
Nothing I think. It is just syntactic sugar :)
☺/ A!ex
--
UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
s, but I'm trying to understand
>what makes a good lisp.
>
>So, why is there no setf in picolisp?
--
SuperSaiyan Blue
Sent via email ;)
that it "violates the spirit of how lisp functions evaluate
their arguments", but no more comment is made.
I hope I'm forgiven if a flame war starts, but I'm trying to understand
what makes a good lisp.
So, why is there no setf in picolisp?
