From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: setq x setf Date: 2000/06/15 Message-ID: <3170098053699025@naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 635097612 References: <0f106a56.4f744979@usw-ex0102-016.remarq.com> <3170059273480607@naggum.no> mail-copies-to: never Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 961109734 17259 195.0.192.66 (15 Jun 2000 22:55:34 GMT) Organization: Naggum Software; vox: +47 8800 8879; fax: +47 8800 8601; http://www.naggum.no User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.6 Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 Jun 2000 22:55:34 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * sashank@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (Sashank Varma) | since SETF is a macro, it has to expand into an expression. | i assume that implementations ensure that this expansion is | pure ANSI CL; this may even be mandated in the standard. Why do you assume that? Why should it be mandated? | one way that i could be wrong is that it could be perfectly legal | for SETF to macroexpand into implementation-specific mechanisms for | modifying bindings, but this just seems wrong. Could you elaborate on why you think this way? #:Erik -- If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.