[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Common Lisp solved this problem 20 years ago

To: srfi-77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Common Lisp solved this problem 20 years ago
From: Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk <qrczak@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:09:48 +0200
Delivered-to: srfi-77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <435F276C.30106@xxxxxxxxxxx> (Per Bothner's message of "Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:51:24 -0700")
Mail-followup-to: srfi-77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: <435E10AE.8010807@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <435F1EF0.9020704@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <435F276C.30106@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk <qrczak@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux)

Per Bothner <per@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Common Lisp allows a compiler to *assume* / is defined to the standard
> / operation, unless there is a visible re-definition.

Common Lisp doesn't allow to rebind standard symbols at all (and some
implementations enforce this). It's undefined behavior.

This applies to rebind standard symbols. Shadowing symbols is a
different thing.

-- 
   __("<         Marcin Kowalczyk
   \__/       qrczak@xxxxxxxxxx
    ^^     http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/

References:
- Common Lisp solved this problem 20 years ago
  - From: Alan Watson
- Re: Common Lisp solved this problem 20 years ago
  - From: Alan Watson
- Re: Common Lisp solved this problem 20 years ago
  - From: Per Bothner

Prev by Date: Re: Common Lisp solved this problem 20 years ago
Next by Date: Re: reading NaNs
Previous by thread: Re: Common Lisp solved this problem 20 years ago
Next by thread: NaN's
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread