At 6:05 PM -0500 1/20/00, Lars Thomas Hansen wrote:
John Clements: >Let me clarify. I have nothing against syntactic abstraction. My >concern is primarily with the unnecessary overloading of the set! >primitive. Replace set! with set-location! (or set-l! if you prefer) >and you have a language extension which >a) I would not personally use, but >b) I would not object to (much). So are you suggesting that (setl! var val) == (set! var val) and also that (setl! (car x) val) == (set-car! x val)? Or are you suggesting only the latter?
Specifically and emphatically the latter. Thanks for the clarification. john